> Why is shooting someone unfair?
Well, I think he meant that the fact that person with the bow has the ability to attack person without a bow from a distance for a long time. Basically, an unfair situation.
Now, bows already have edges (+3, I think). I think tSimon was just saying that -- at a distance -- a bow has such an enormous advantage over a melee weapon that he felt +10 was more in line.
Of course, once the sword is next to the bow, the bow is worthless.
> Why a bid of 1? Why should I have to justify a hire bid? Is it that I
> should shoot them, then face them without any other weapon in single combat? > That does seem more fair
I'm not sure why Simon thinks a bid of 1 is default and all other bids must be justified. But, let me try to guess: First, I think he is assuming that the archer has a overwhelming positional advantage (distance) over his foe. Thus, the +10 edge. Second, it should not take any real effort on the part of the archer to maintain this position. Thus, his attacks require minimal effort (1AP), but remember, if he succeeds, he has a 11AP attack because of the edge. If he loses, he must only forfeit 1 AP (or 2 or 3), which in this case basically represents only getting tired or running out of arrows or slowly wearing out his bow.
Spending more than 1AP means that the archer must be doing something that potentially exposes him to increased threat: he's moving, he's pulling harder, he's ripping a fletch off the two arrows with his teeth so he can shoot both at once, he's standing up for a better shot, or he's taking time to carefully aim (in this case, a loss of APs would represent the target being able to close the advantage of distance).
[Side Note: Remember, APs represent relative advantage in the contest/combat...not just pure damage. When you lose APs, you are losing ground; when you forfeit APs, you are actually somehow *giving* your opponent an advantage.]
> sneaking up and setting up for some shots is a waste of time too....
No, I'm convinced that single-shot kills are definitely possible, I'm just not sure of the mechanics...I will post a question about it to HWRules.
> Also, just to analyze this some more, I think there must be a penalty for a moving target, depending on
> terrain. If you are climbing a wall, you will be easier to hit than if you are running a zig zag across an open
> field. If you are running straight at me, I should get a bonus for picking and idiot as a target, and maybe
> extra for your velocity as you are approaching my arrow.
Definitely: a target moving or using ground is always getting a bonus to his defense. Just for grins:
Daren is being attacked by a archer several dozens of yards away. Daren is in open ground. He has "Quick Reflexes 17", so he declares he will use that skill for his basic defense. The archer must roll against a difficulty of 17. Daren also says he is continuously making snap rolls, dives, and zig-zags to improve his chances. Looking over his character sheet, we see he knows "Combat Tactics 17" as well. This is a promising skill to use for such tactical manuevers, so he rolls for a augmentation to his Quick Reflexes. Looking further, we also see that Daren is an initiate of Yinkin, who's cat-like reflexes are well known. He calls on his Cat's Leap feat help him jump gracefully and quickly, thus getting another augmentation. Well all is said and done, Daren's Quick Relfexes is probably augmented above a mastery (say, 1W or 2W), giving him a very good advantage against the archer now (who, we presume probably does not have a mastery, or only 1 at most).
> Just some food for thought. (unless I am missing something here, please correct me)
Good comments...forwarding to HWRules for additional observation.
-- Clay claycle_at_...
Powered by hypermail