Manyshot

[Kregor]

Prerequisites: Dex 17+, point blank, rapid shot

This feat allows you to knock and fire two arrows at once, and shoot them both at the same target, at a -4 penalty to hit. This would twin each shot from a missle weapon, using up ammo at twice the rate.

[Jerigo]

Would it be possible for this feat to open up a new command, like "twin" instead of "shoot"? I'm guessing that just because someone is capable of making a twin shot doesn't mean that he or she would want to in every situation. At least that would probably be the case in real life, maybe it would be different in-game.

[Argentia]

I imagine this feat would work like a metamagic feat. You could turn it off or on with combatmode, ie "combatmode +twin shot" would make your shots fired double.

[Kregor]

Yeah, I would figure like twin spell, etc. it would be a combatmode mode.

[Travis]

I really like this idea, but it sounds like I'd have to go buy some more crossbow bolts...
>.>
<.<

[Exer]

That skill should not apply to crossbows as it's all mechaniqual. Unless the crossbow is built to accommodate such a feature in which case it would be the weapon and should not be the skill that would allow you to shoot two bolts at the same time.

[Telk]

I like the idea but I think that a command 'twin' would be better because it would be quicker to access, it would just be a addon to do more damage while shooting instead of constant, would save a lot of time too.
What I am proposing is that the arrows on default would shoot out one at a time and when you want two arrows just substitute the 'shoot' command with the 'twin' command.

[Ninde]

I like the idea... But I think that feat would be restricted to elves and rangers, instead of all warriors.

[Travis]

Ahh, but rangers and elves arn't the only ones who are known to become masters of archery. I'm not sure on the D&D rules though.

[Kregor]

Actually, to be consistent with D&D rules...

It would only be allowable with a bow, not a crossbow, and doubling thrown projectiles in tabletop falls under the two handed rules, as I recall.

It would be available to fighters as well, for that matter, any class that can also take point blank and rapid shot as prerequisites.

As far as a command vs. a combatmode, I have no problem with a combatmode, keeps it consistent with feat enhanced combat moves and spells, and I already have to set a combatmode for ranged in order to fire arrows point blank, can just as easily make an alias to set +ranged and +manyshot at the same time.

[Keltorn]

Actually, to be consistent with D&D rules...

It would be available to fighters as well, for that matter, any class that can also take point blank and rapid shot as prerequisites.

Yep, that's right. Even wizards can get Manyshot, but they have to get the feats first, and Manyshot has a base attack bonus requirement of +6. Besides, they're not even proficient with bows.
For D&D Rangers, they are treated as though they have Manyshot at level 6, but only if they chose to focus on archery over two-weapon combat. This applies even if they don't have enough Dex or they skipped getting Point Blank Shot or Rapid Shot (but archer rangers will have rapid shot by now).
Should rangers get Manyshot for free, or should they still have to work for it?

[Kregor]

Until and unless the guild files are reworked for 3.5E specs, which I kind of hope they will be, since we're moving to 3.5E spell system, it will probably just stay as a feat that is trainable, but not automatically gained.

As it stands, we do not have the feat allocations of 3.5E, rather, feats have been grafted onto a kind-of-2E-feel guild file, with MUD-style skills that have to be found and trained, rather than just gotten with progression. With the coming of prestige classes, new spell system and etc, it may be time to double take the guild files and see how we could rethink the feat/skill allocs on all the guilds, and mix some things like ranger combat styles, and prestige class bonus feats, along with keeping the flavor of finding and seeking trainers to learn and build your skills.

But that's my opinion, not necessarily the opinions of the coding team. And at this point, the spell system is kind of first priority, from my observation.

[Timaeus]

This feat would be fine if it only applies to the shoot command and not melee combat (including missile weapons with point blank shot). The simple, unbalancing, and over-powering reason for not allowing it in melee combat is the 8-12 attacks per round given to fighters rangers and paladins who have this feat. The -4 to hit is pretty much useless in current combat system. This feat should only apply to the opening attack or a distance shot and not every attack. Fighter Rangers and Paladins are far too powerful without doubling their attacks per round.

[Argentia]

I understand your point, Timaeus, but I was just wondering, how one gets off 12 hits with a bow? Only fighters get fifth attack, so that would let them have 10 attacks, if they're lucky... Rangers and paladins would get 8, although I have a feeling the few paladins we have would not take this feat... You can feel free to disagree, but that's just my opinion.

Anyway, my question was really just, how did you get 12 attacks? I can only come up with 10.

[Timaeus]

Nothing precludes paladins from taking bows and the feats associated with them, particularly an elven paladin. Its not an argument but it is an available option so they were included.


Rapid Shot Feat
===============
With this feat you can use ranged weapons with exceptional speed. You
get an extra attack off per round with your ranged weapon.

This feat requires knowledge of the ranged weapon in question such as bows,
crossbows and slings. It also requires a high dexterity and a knowledge of
the point blank shot skill.

Fighters 5 attacks +1 x2 = 12
Rangers 4 attacks +1 x 2 = 10
Paladins 4 attacks +1 x 2 = 10

And its not luck, a warrior subclass will hit with a high degree of success regardless of armor, dodge being the only realy factor in missing.

[Lathander]

How would "deflect" work with this? Aren't ranged attacks considerably less effective with this ability in place on the opponent?

[Argentia]

Ah, I hadn't considered rapid shot. That makes sense then.

Regardless, I don't think it's as unbalancing as you make it out to be... I'll admit that 12 attacks per round is somewhat ridiculious of a number, but you also have to take into account factors that work heavily against the bow and arrow... For example, enchanted arrows aren't (as yet, to my knowledge) codable. Bow and arrow also relies on ammo, so if you had 100 arrows and were sending off an average of 8 arrows per round, you'd run out of ammo in 12 and a half rounds. It's more economical to just wield two enchanted blades. No upkeep, except on the rare occasion that they damage, they have pluses(rather than minuses, as with this feat) to hit and damage, and they are much easier to train with, since they have no ammo to resupply.

So while 12 attacks per round IS rather ridiculious, to me it seems ironically necessary if we want to make the bow and arrow more balanced. It gets such little attention as is, very rarely do I see anyone use it for more than just RP. My personal opinion is that we should give more incentive to people to use it... It's a great weapon to RP with and can be deadly when in the right hands. *reminisces about his archer from BGII* Good times...

[Kregor]

From using archery, a LOT I see at least half of my arrows fall to the ground in scraps, or get deflected, even if there's no deflection feat working against it. Archery, as is, is weak compared to melee. Maybe this will chance with a rework of the combat system, but that has yet to happen.

[Ellian]

From using archery, a LOT I see at least half of my arrows fall to the ground in scraps, or get deflected, even if there's no deflection feat working against it. Archery, as is, is weak compared to melee. Maybe this will chance with a rework of the combat system, but that has yet to happen.

From my experience with archery, yes, a rediculous amount of arrows scrap, but only if you are firing from a distance. But, I recover probably nineteen out of twenty arrows shot when using a bow in melee with combatmode +ranged set. As for arrow deflection, my guess would be that all mobs have the deflect arrows feat. Mobs of higher level deflect more arrows through this feat while low level mobs deflect fewer. Archery against a target without arrow deflection could actually potentially be as powerful or more powerful than melee combat, with the use of the rapid shot feat to increase your attacks from four to five for rangers and paladins, five to six for fighters and barbarians.

but you also have to take into account factors that work heavily against the bow and arrow... For example, enchanted arrows aren't (as yet, to my knowledge) codable.

They are codable, but due to the way the game sets the value of an item based on material, quality, etc. plus enchantments like +hit/+dam, a magical arrow can cost as much as a similarly enchanted magical sword.

Bow and arrow also relies on ammo, so if you had 100 arrows and were sending off an average of 8 arrows per round, you'd run out of ammo in 12 and a half rounds. It's more economical to just wield two enchanted blades. No upkeep, except on the rare occasion that they damage, they have pluses(rather than minuses, as with this feat) to hit and damage, and they are much easier to train with, since they have no ammo to resupply.

While enchanted arrows aren't exactly economical, nonmagical arrows actually are, if properly recollected as described above. As for your example of a hundred arrows lasting twelve rounds, I can only think of a handful of mobs and even fewer PCs off-hand that can stand up to a hundred hits in twelve rounds.

So while 12 attacks per round IS rather ridiculious, to me it seems ironically necessary if we want to make the bow and arrow more balanced. It gets such little attention as is, very rarely do I see anyone use it for more than just RP. My personal opinion is that we should give more incentive to people to use it... It's a great weapon to RP with and can be deadly when in the right hands. *reminisces about his archer from BGII* Good times...

A bow can be deadly effective in the right hands on FK too, and if the only action it's seeing is roleplayed action, that's unfortunate. I don't see any real weaknesses or shortcomings about the bow right now to justify a feat increasing a warrior's attacks with it to twelve per round.

Jayson

[Kregor]

They are codable, but due to the way the game sets the value of an item based on material, quality, etc. plus enchantments like +hit/+dam, a magical arrow can cost as much as a similarly enchanted magical sword.

Actually, I have confirmed on the test port that pretty much all the APPLY flags that would affect the missile when it hits (to add +hit/+damage, spell effects, etc) do not actually work, at all. you can load up a mob that's only hit by magic, and pelt away with arrows coded +anything and flagged magic, and they'll always miss.

Also, as far as melee damage goes, versus even point blank archery, note that an arrow does 1d6 damage per hit, while pretty much everything short of a dagger or shortsword does more.

Then also take into account that missles do not get the STR damage bonus added to melee attacks. DEX only adds to a missile weapon's to hit, not the damage. Thus, fighters at titanic STR with dual wielded melee weapons can easiy do twice the damage of an arrow even shot at point blank.

Unblancing? I don't think