I'm sure someone must have thought of this before.. but Kensai, and not Archers, make the best ranged damage characters.
Why you ask?
Throwing axes. Kensai can use them, and kensai get more hit/dam bonuses then Archers get (archer bonuses slow down at higher levels).
Also, the magical throwing axe K'logarath +4 does more average damage then any other weapon (except the Firetooth crossbow, which it matches) -- all before you even apply str damage modifiers, which don't apply to bows.
So it seems to me that if you want the best range attacker you can get, go with a kensai with gm in axes, not an archer.
Kensai -- The best ranged character?
-
Stilgar
- Posts: 4079
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 11:00 am
- Location: The Netherlands - Sietch Tabr
- Contact:
Damn, you could be right (am not very good in calculating how much damage i will do) The only rpoblem is taht you only get that axe in ToB. But you could use the rifthome axe (never had it myself, jusjt saw it on gamebanshee, it should be for sale, but i think it's in the secret stash)
And dont forget the speedfactor0 that K'logarath has
And dont forget the speedfactor0 that K'logarath has
I do not have the touch, nor do I have the power.
Time to throw in my 2 cents as dwarven berserker nut... =D
Fun, fun, fun weapon. Whirlwind and that are just unfair; continuous stream of axes flying out of your hand. People can't be lucky and save vs. death THAT frequently; they're going to get knocked back. And even if they don't, the hit itself stalls them for a second.
-Cross
Fun, fun, fun weapon. Whirlwind and that are just unfair; continuous stream of axes flying out of your hand. People can't be lucky and save vs. death THAT frequently; they're going to get knocked back. And even if they don't, the hit itself stalls them for a second.
-Cross
Don't forget that throwing dagger, Fire Tooth +3. It does decent damage, 2d4+3, +1d2 fire damage, and has the range of a bow.
There's nothing a little poison couldn't cure...
What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, ... to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security.
What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, ... to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security.
