Chance to hit increases with level, but damage not so much, especially not for ranged characters. DR isn’t ordinarily a problem for high-level archers not because they can punch through it, but because they generally have a good supply of special-material arrows. Like what Haley just (unsuccessfully) tried.
As for the miss, either Crystal has a big dodge bonus to AC, or Haley just got unlucky and rolled a 1. She’s using Multishot, there, which means all three of those arrows used the same attack roll.
Nuts and bolts answer : by and large, a character gains more and more attacks as their Base Attack Bonus increases. Every 5 points BaB increase is one more attack. Naturally, different classes have different BaB progressions (e.g. warriors gain +1 BaB every level, Rogue get 3/4th of +1/level, Mages get 1/4th IIRC).
However, these additional attacks are not done at full BaB : each successive attack is at an incremental -5. So, for example, a level 11 warrior would have (factoring out every possible bonus) 3 attacks per round, one done at +11, one at +6 and one at +1.
At high levels, really only those attacks that come late in a character’s attack iteration are really affected by, say, magical weapons or high stats and what have you. The attack bonus on the first, second, even third attack is usually high enough that they just won’t miss the average mob, for a variety of math reasons (the first of which is that while BaB grows naturally, AC is static for most classes).
Now, archers specifically are even more affected by this general state of affairs, because they have access to a number of feats that allow them to rain even more arrows/turn (both because it’s what fantasy archers do, and for balance reasons because individual arrows don’t do as much damage as melee weapons)… but they all come with accuracy downgrades (again, due to an even mix of “realism”, balance and forcing tactical choices).
TL;DR : no, it’s not particularly weird for Haley to miss some shots. Even at point-blank - that’s just a +1 to attack & damage for the Point Blank Shot feat, and an *absence *of malus from long range/visibility/cover/etc…
Do players/DMs make a point of keeping track of standard arrows? Seems like if you’re making it rain pointy wooden death, you’d run out fairly early on during an adventure of any length. Either that or your character starts carrying around a silly number of arrows that couldn’t realistically be handled by one person. Back when I played ages ago, no one was really an “archer”. You might have a fighter or ranger with a bow proficiency but they still spent most of their time swinging a sword.
I know OotS lampshaded this when Roy used Haley’s bow but I was wondering about actual game campaigns.
Yes and no. When I DM I make my players keep track of special arrows (because, well, they’re special - no, you don’t have an infinite number of flaming adamantine arrows) and *accessible *arrows.
That is to say, yes, Legolas is assumed to have an arbitrary number of vanilla arrows on his or her person and to be able to make new ones in the black voids between individual scenes. Unless scarcity is the driving theme of the scenario (e.g. lost in the desert, or stranded at sea). And/or to carry an ungodly amount of them in various sacks, packs, portable holes in reality and so forth.
However, that doesn’t mean they’re all within easy reach while fighting. I tend to allow 3 quivers of 20 (one on each hip plus one across the back) - I know that even that is in practice kind of ridiculous, but fantasy. Once those 60 arrows are gone (and with archer feats, 60 individual shots can whiz by pretty fast ! Not to mention, the character might want to keep a stash of specialty arrow handy but not necessarily use them in any situation), the archer has to “waste” actions either picking some from the field or rooting around in their pack for more.
This because archery-based fighters are generally plain better than melee guys, so they require balancing factors.
Note that this only really applies to characters whose primary method of attack is bowmanship, be they Rangers who never understood the versatility of their class, or Zen Archer Monks, or even Gunslingers (in which case, no dude, you don’t have 100 pounds worth of lead balls nor 4 cubic meters of powder on you at all times). Adventurers who *might *switch to their bows once in a while to finish off a fleeing monster or “pull” a group of mobs are spared such indignities.
I’ve created a few characters like that. One was actually a melee character, who used a combination of Iaijutsu and Fleshgrinding katanas to perform the classic “sword cabinet” magic trick, without the cabinet.
Eh, not really. Melee guys can pump out a ton more damage, between Power Attack and most sources of bonus damage only working within 30’ (at which point, you might as well be in melee). The only advantage that archers have is that they can fight without being next to the enemy, but given that the best warrior-type classes (melee or ranged) tend to have good armor and high HP, they really want to be right next to the enemy anyway, to keep squishier party members from being in that position instead.
Archers have Deadly Aim, Power Attack for ranged weapons. At least, in PF they do, not 3.5 as in OoTS. I recently ran a campaign where the archer was doing as much as the barbarian but they were specialized enough that put the target at range and the barbarian could do little and same for the archer in melee.
It’s more debatable in 3.5E, yeah - I’ll admit that my perception of classes and stuff is more based on *Pathfinder *where archers have gained a number of useful damage-dealing feats, notably a Power Attack equivalent and a number of Fighter and Ranger rebalancing doodads.
Still, the basic advantage of always being able to do a full attack iteration and being able to split your attacks between every monster in sight no matter where they are and more or less regardless of the tactical situation applies just fine in 3.5E, and that’s kind of a big deal. Monsters with flight ? Don’t care. DR ? Don’t care. Difficult terrain ? Don’t care. Reach ? Don’t care. Mirror Image tanking ? Enough attacks/rnd that don’t care. Fast moving + spring attacking ? Don’t care. Cover or concealement ? Takes a mid-level feat, but soon enough, don’t care. Etc…
They also get to specialize in one and only one (very common) weapon only while still being able to easily find adaptable magical gear (elemental arrows, special material arrows, arrows of Bane This and Bane That…) and can switch between them on the fly while melee fighters either have to rely on lucky drops, paying out the ass for specific bonuses, and/or a golfbag-worth of weapons.
So Bozzok took all the money Haley gave him to pay for the resurrections of the guild members she killed and brought back Crystal as a murder golem instead?
Look, I don’t care how much flack I get for this, I need to take a controversial stand here: I just don’t think Bozzok is a nice guy.
That part of today’s strip confused me. I thought when Haley killed Crystal, she declared that the deal was off and she wasn’t giving Bozzok “one copper piece ever again.” At the time, I thought Haley was saying that she wasn’t going to hold up her part of the bargain that Celia made in her name. So I thought that Bozzok didn’t actually get any of Haley’s treasure. Or was it just that the guild took what she had with her and she was resolving not to give them a cut of her future treasure?
I just noticed something : apparently, part of Crystal’s conversion to a golem involved lopping off her breasteses (and dropping her corset).
I don’t know if I’m weird for noticing that, or if I’m weirder for being ooged the hell out by the notion.
