Higher plus arrows and bolts
Jarrakul
Member Posts: 2,029
So, in BG1, archers are amazing. In BG2 and into TOB, they weaken dramatically, to the point where only the Archer kit remains viable as a primary ranged combatant. This seems to be generally accepted. There are a number of reasons for it, and fixing the problem entirely would be difficult, but there is an easy fix that'd help a lot. Add arrows and bolts +3 to BG2 (preferable available pre-underdark), and arrows and bolts +4 to TOB. This would enable archers to damage things like Balors and many TOB bosses without adding nearly enough power to bring them to their absurd BG1 levels. Adding these arrows would particularly help longbow archers (who can't fall back on the unloaded Shortbow of Gesen or the Firetooth crossbow), and therefore would make the TOB longbows slightly less terrible, but it'd help all archers at least a bit, which seems to be warranted.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
1
Comments
Keep in mind, +2 can hit about 85% or so of enemies in the game. Only 4 (technically 5, since there's 2 demi-liches) in the game require +4 or above. and only about 12 or so require +3 or above. You get like 4 stacks of 40 +4 arrows, bolts, and bullets on the first floor of Watcher's keep alone. And more spread throughout the keep. And you can buy them in ToB at Saradush, Amekethran and that merchant in the area you warp to outside of Saradush.
Do away with that "Oh, you found a +3 bow/arrow, pity but it doesn't grant a bonus to damage like in BG1". That was one of those decisions that baffled me the most, as it made sure that ranged damage stayed purely in a support role as an also-ran.
What they really need to do, is tweak all the bows to give a damage bonus equal to their str requirement. Most of them are too low to have a bonus, but any bow with a 16 or above would have at least +1 damage. The Strong Arm should actually be doing +7 a hit, due to it's 19 str requirement.
In PnP bows can be specially made to benefit from str bonuses, but as a catch it also raises their str requirement to whatever amount of str you're trying to allow damage for.
16 = +1
18 = +2 (maximum a short bow can benefit from)
18/XX = +3-6
19= +7
Ergo, a +2 Bow and a +2 Arrow would have a +4 Hittability.
I think this was an overlooked suggestion... but I really did push hard for Halberd's Piercing/Slashing damage change.
@Boaster: That's an interesting idea. I'd be all for it, but I don't know how easy it'd be to implement. Understand, half the reason I'm making the suggestion I am is that it'd be really easy to implement.
In BG, arrows applied their enchantment as both damage and thac0 bonuses (i.e. arrows +1 gave +1 damage and +1 thac0). In BG2, they no longer grant thac0 damage bonuses. Many elemental arrows had their damage severely nerfed.
In BG (and BGEE) slings applied strength bonus damage, which was dropped in BG2.
Walking speeds, in general, increased by about 25% from BG to BG2, allowing characters to get into melee range quicker.
Finally, a lot of the higher end monsters in BG2 have either AC bonuses against missiles, substantial missile damage reductions, or outright immunity (e.g. dragons can't be hit by non-magical projectiles). I think you'll find that +4 ammunition would still not help you much against the high level creatures.
The big problem with providing higher enchanted ammunition is that high end launchers stack with them. Adding +5 bolts to Firetooth would give you +10 to hit from the weapon and ammo alone, which is ridiculous at any level.
That said, I don't get your last point at all. You're arguing that ranged weapons are too weak to be fixed, and then you turn around and argue that higher plus ammo would make them too good? Because they get an additional +1 or +2 to hit? How could that possibly be true?
Whether or not we should do it anyway is a different question, and one I didn't address.
Now, as to your concern that an additional +1 or +2 to hit would unbalance them in some way... I just don't see it. I don't think even an additional +10 to hit would make ranged weapons nearly as good as melee weapons. THAC0 just isn't that important by mid-late BG2. I say let ranged weapons have their insane THAC0, let it get even more insane if that'd help them even a bit. Why not? Are we seriously concerned that ranged weapons might become too good because of another +2 to hit? High-level combatants don't exactly miss much. Frankly, I'd be surprised if anyone even noticed another +2 to hit by TOB. I guess it might make Imoen and Nalia marginally more effective with their bows, but I honestly don't see that as a major balance concern.
That said, I think I've argued this about as far as it's worth arguing. You've read my points, and me repeating them isn't gonna give you any more information. Given that slings already have the high plus ammo, and that shortbows and crossbows have workarounds in their infinite ammo launchers, I'm just not invested enough in this issue to argue it further than I already have. I just figured it was a very easy fix to a minor problem that would, in some small way, help to make ranged weapons less terrible.
Another alteration could could be restoring the enchantment damage bonus to arrows.
Like Everard's Sling hit's as +5, but the bullets are just +2 damage.
Gesen hits as +4
That bow i can never remember the name of in trademeet hits as +3.
Or Firetooth (crossbow) hitting as +4/+5 but the bolts are just +2 fire bolts.
Essentially, Longbows are the only launcher that doesn't have option to hit +4 (and technically it does, Cattie-brie's bow hit's as +4 and is a longbow..but you have to deal that stupid Harpel if you kill them and steal it)
They aren't supposed to benefit from any bonus attacks except from the bow having the speed property. Maybe haste.
And specialization/expertise is supposed to work completely different for bows/xbows then other weapons (** removes the to-hit penalty for firing at targets within 15 ft, and boosts damage by +1 (+2 for crossbows) for targets within 15ft (expertise doesn't get the damage bonus). And *** just adds another 15ft to maximum range that they can shoot without penalty, and removes the bonus attackers get when attempting to strike a bow/xbow wielder in melee).
From a balance perspective, the reason bows deal less damage then melee is due to melee having to accept much greater risks for it. And only having a base 1 attack, with most of it's value coming from str. A bow will perform just as well in the hands of weaker character as it will a stronger one, while melee weapons are MUCH less effective compared to someone with very high str or when used by a non-warrior class.
Getting up to +5 damage from specialization, or up to 2 extra attacks, is perfectly fine compensation.
But that only applies to warrior classes, rogues will still suck you may say? Well...yeah..cause rogues aren't meant for combat. Their only purpose in a party is utility. And I'm not making that up. It's LITERALLY their only purpose for existing. And due to the massive buff BG made to backstab, Thieves shouldn't go anywhere near a ranged weapon, unless their an assassin...and even then...darts are better for applying poison. And since bows have higher base attacks, it allows the rogues to deal more damage then they could vs BS immune enemies in melee. Barring dual-speed weapons, but with BG's nerf to rogue dual-wielding, it's not nearly as effective as it should be.