Maybe you could work with Selthar, I think he might be willing to help with explosives...

I just had an idea to make it a little more useful...

Maybe the arrow, if it hits it's target, has to be pulled out, otherwise it will cause some bleeding, and pulling it out will do a small amount of damage?

I was thinking of something like that, but then I though how it would quickly become overpowered. It's almost inevitable that the later stages of archery would include multi-shot or quick-shot options, and pulling out multiple arrows every round of combat, even for minor damage, would add up, and assuming it took about a half-second of balance each; would be impossible to set up a trigger for all of them.

Despite this, however, A certain skill could be used to do this I think. It could have a second of aiming time, and a slightly longer balance recovery. That would seem to me a perfectly plausible skill, but in the upper-mid areas of the skillset, likely virtuoso.

If it took balance to pull out an arrow, all you would have to do is get two archers and that person is perma-stuck.

well, I never said it would take balance away...
require balance, sure, but no need to take it away.
My idea was that you would either leave it in, doing small amounts of damage over time, or you could pull it out, which would do more damage, so it's more of a do I wait until I have more health until I pull it out, or take it out right away?

Again, the problem with that is the question of adding up over time. Setting up a trigger would be almost certainly suicidal in many cases, as you don't want to pull out an arrow when on the brink of death. The idea holds merit, though, in the fact that it would be the only way to make archery realistic. This, of course, is why Archery will almost certainly never make it to Lusternia as a full blown skillset; if, indeed, at all.

Only Barbed arrows would cause noticeable damage when pulled out, maybe 50-100? Regular arrows would be more around 25-50. So, that's not adding up for a while.

I think 25-50 for a normal arrow, and then 50-100 seems a little low, but yeah, barbed arrows should do more

Now the only thing left is to base the accuracy and effectiveness of the arrow on the archer's dexterity.

This actually is shaping up to be an interesting proposition. I think that maybe if a large enough playerbase is achieved to unlock Ackleberry and one of the trapped cities that maybe it could be introduced as a one of Ackleberry's guildskills. Not sure if the Divine will go for it, but I like to keep my hopes up. Furrikin archers would quite possibly match shadowcaster faelings in awesomeness (being overpowered).

I would definitely create a Furrikin archer to help bring up the numbers for Ackleberry.

But using the bow itself as a weapon should be discouraged, unless perhaps a high-level Crossbow skill would allow the use of some sort of bayonet on the crossbow. But that would be a rather useless weapon, in most circumstances. It -would- allow you to fight close in without having to switch weapons.

eh, why not just allow the archer to stab someone with an arrow when in the same room, for less damage.

not a fan of leaving a skill just for one commune when it could be used by everyone

seriously a Ranger/Assassin archtype for the win

Now that the communes have an archer floorplan, though, there needs to be one for the cities. What's to distinguish a Forest archer from a City archer? Please don't say Rituals or Totems.

*pained sigh*

Forest Archers = Rangers of the Forest

City Archers = Archers of an Army

Still... Cities would be better with Assassins instead of Archers and have Archery or Long Range weaponry style of thingie as their prime technique and have a skill similar but not quite to Athletics. Maybe subterfuge.

This whole idea is very bland. It doesn't belong in Lusternia. Stop wasting your time, this will never be implemented.

who said you had to read it?
Maybe we have fun with creating ideas, even if they probably won't get implemented. And last I checked, you aren't a divine, and don't get to say what does/doesn't get put in...

And besides, we might actually come up with a not so bland idea. If you're complaining about bland, think about knighthood and the four specializations of it. They've been used before, have they not?

Lets learn to ignore Bali's posts... shall we?


HOwever, you should probabbly look at the history of Archery in Imperian with Wardens.. its a good lesson on theory going wrong.

Well, I don't know anything about it, would you care to explain what happened?

Not sure what exactly happened in Imperian, but I've heard of a story in Achea about a serpent and a monk going PKing in a forest one day. Serpents are assassins, it seems, and monks have telepathy there. The serpent, from about twenty rooms away, fired Meteor Arrows into the sky to fall down on and immediately evicerate the offending monk. After picking up his body and walking home, he was caught in a kai choke from thirty rooms away, instantly v-locked, and fell over dead in seconds.

Lesson in question: Rangers can get overpowered. Very easily.
Solution: Limit the range of a bow and the flexibility of its line of fire.

The core problem is that you can't create a class based on ranged combat. It can be added, but to base the class around it leads to impossible to balance disparity. I can hit you from out of the room, you can't hit me back.

Mages/Druids have line of sight attacks, but they are entirely negated by shield. If you designed an entire skillset for ranged combat, you'd need to include a way to attack through shield, similar to how warriors can raze/slash, or cleave.

It's a very, very fine line between fun and exciting, and overpowered.