18 réponses à ce sujet

[Marko GW]

So I wanna go for an archer my next playthrough and I keep getting mixed messages reading various posts on the forum?

So can anyone explain what is going on with the dex bug? 

Is there a point in making an archer, are there other workarounds on this issue? 

The last I read was: 

Daggers get bonus damage solely from strength (exactly the same as other melee weapons).  This is a bug.
Bows (shortbows and longbows) get 50% strength + 50% dexterity.  They're working exactly the way they should.
Crossbows get no bonus damage from attributes at all.  This is also a bug--they're supposed to get bonus damage solely from dexterity.

Is this true?

Modifié par Marko GW, 13 juillet 2010 - 04:29 .

[electricfish]

On the PS3 (and possibly Xbox) bows do not get a dexterity bonus, but on PC they do. I think crossbows are such a hotly debated item simply because no one actually knows if they are supposed to get any kind of damage bonus.

Daggers are currently listed as getting .85 bonus from strength in-game, but for certain they do not give the 50/50 dex and strength bonus that they should. Patch 1.04 is supposed to fix that 1.02 said it fixed.

[ladydesire]

Is there a reliable source for the claim that dex benefits Archers on PC? It's not in the current patch notes on the patch download page.

[bri193]

Marko GW wrote...
So can anyone explain what is going on with the dex bug? 

I can tell you from a PC play perspective only. since I
don't use PS3 or xbox

Daggers get bonus damage solely from strength (exactly the same as other melee weapons).  This is a bug.

The dagger bug has been around since day of release. There are
mods that fix this... Bioware says this will be fixed in 1.04, but I do not believe anything Bioware says these days...

Bows (shortbows and longbows) get 50% strength + 50% dexterity.  They're working exactly the way they should.

On a PC this is the way it currently works. Whether this is right or wrong is debatable...
IMO, this is the way it should work:
Short bows: 100% DEX
Longbows: 50% STR + 50% DEX
I use a mod that does this for both character and enemies ... Favours rogue-type classes, particularly with Lethality and longbows

Crossbows get no bonus damage from attributes at all.  This is also a bug--they're supposed to get bonus damage solely from dexterity.

Currently Xbows have no artibute bonus. IMO, they should get a 100% bonus from STR, nothing from DEX...
II use a mod that does this for both character and enemies ... Favours fighter-type classes as xbows should be.

My one an only complete playthough was with a rogue full archey spec'ed character. This with v1.02 and using a mod called Better Archery/Combat.  This made archey a viable character spec and made enemy archers and xbows dangerous. I would not play an archer in DA:O without this mod, but that is me...

Unfortunately, this mod is no longer available (modder took it off Nexus many months ago), and is not compatable with v1.03. For this, and other reasons, I have not installed 1.03 nor Awakening.

[Sidney]

bri193 wrote...

Currently Xbows have no artibute bonus. IMO, they should get a 100% bonus from STR, nothing from DEX...
II use a mod that does this for both character and enemies ... Favours fighter-type classes as xbows should be.

Why would any missile weapon with a string get a strength bonus for damage? I get it for spears and axes you hurtl.

Is the theory with longbows that is that they can draw them further? Really there's only so far you can pull a bow string so that makes not much sense. I know the draw weight of an English longbow was quite high (maybe 2x a modern bow) but the notion that the Enlgish archers in Henry V's army were supermen is silly and I'd think that in DAO terms they're not anything more than a baseline character would be. No matter how strong you are there's only so far you can pull the string so once you reach that level (again not that high a level) it isn't about strength in anyway.

For Xbows, assuming you can crank or pull the string into place there' no strength involved in anything other than reload time and unless you are using a higher per shot damage as a proxy for more shots per minute there's also no reaosn for strength to be in the mix.

[Marko GW]

@ bri193 - Thanks for the thorough reply, and a follow up question:



So now, because the bows use 50-50 str&dex does it mean that the longbows are better or..?



And how do you measure the distance in the game?? (stupid question, but...)

[ladydesire]

Sidney wrote...

Why would any missile weapon with a string get a strength
bonus for damage? I get it for spears and axes you hurtl.

Same reason; because your strength determines the damage you do with the arrow (it should actually determine the distance the arrow flies, though).

Is the theory with longbows that is that they can draw them
further? Really there's only so far you can pull a bow string so
that makes not much sense. I know the draw weight of an
English longbow was quite high (maybe 2x a modern bow) but
the notion that the Enlgish archers in Henry V's army were
supermen is silly and I'd think that in DAO terms they're not
anything more than a baseline character would be. No matter
how strong you are there's only so far you can pull the string
so once you reach that level (again not that high a level) it
isn't about strength in anyway.

See my previous comment.

[Welnic]

Sidney wrote...

Why would any missile weapon with a string get a strength bonus for damage? I get it for spears and axes you hurtl.

Is the theory with longbows that is that they can draw them further? Really there's only so far you can pull a bow string so that makes not much sense. I know the draw weight of an English longbow was quite high (maybe 2x a modern bow) but the notion that the Enlgish archers in Henry V's army were supermen is silly and I'd think that in DAO terms they're not anything more than a baseline character would be. No matter how strong you are there's only so far you can pull the string so once you reach that level (again not that high a level) it isn't about strength in anyway.

For Xbows, assuming you can crank or pull the string into place there' no strength involved in anything other than reload time and unless you are using a higher per shot damage as a proxy for more shots per minute there's also no reaosn for strength to be in the mix.

While it's true that once you pull the bow string back all of the way more strength doesn't help, if you are stronger you can use a bow that takes more strength to pull it back all of the way. So if you are stronger you can use a bow that shoots arrows faster, so they go farther and hit harder.

[bri193]

Marko GW wrote...
@ bri193 - Thanks for the thorough reply, and a follow up question:
So now, because the bows use 50-50 str&dex does it mean that the longbows are better or..?
And how do you measure the distance in the game?? (stupid question, but...)

You are welcome!

Regarding longbows...
First a general observation: There are more longbows with special attributes placed in the game than shortbows. So, based on this longbows have a leg up over short bows. Then there are the base range/damge differences that favour longbows.
To be an effective archer in vanillia DA:O you will need to pump up both STR and DEX.  If playing a rogue class, pumping STR, particularly in early game is not wise since so many of your main talents/skills rely on DEX. Until you get Lethality, any points in STR, beyond the basic armour requirements is a waste, at worst, this can seriously gimp your rogue. I have played only rogue classes, so this my perspective.
If playing a fighter class pure archer, at least you can gain some benefit early game from both STR and DEX. However, since I have never played this type of character, I have no idea how viable this is mid to late game. I suspect lots of DEX, similar to STR for a rogue class, will be a waste of attribute points in the long run. There is no fighter attribute that swaps DEX for STR like the rogue Lethality that swaps STR for DEX.

As for game range distance, you get a feel for this pretty quick. If you can mouse over and 'see' and enemy, you can range attack it .Hitting it is another matter, and results will be based on your DEX..

[bri193]

Sidney wrote...
Why would any missile weapon with a string get a strength bonus for damage? I get it for spears and axes you hurtl.

I agree with the previous posts on this. Just want to add, pulling a longbow string does indeed take strength. English longbow men were a 'special' force. They were more than just your bog-standard archers. If you play any RTS games set during the time, building/recruiting longbowmen always takes more resources and effort than basic archers. There is a reason for this.

Also, arming a powerful xbow takes strength, and so does holding/aiming the damn thing. Don't confuse a proper medieval xbow with modern ones built with composite materials, or those little one-handed things you see actors waving about in films.

[hazmatzak]

For crossbows, to simplify matters, assume that the STR required to arm and then hold/aim it are the same, and that is reflected by the item.

Once you reach that threshold, how would being super-strong increase the damage?

[Marko GW]

@bri193 - Again, thank for the reply... you're most helpful.

So you recommend a rogue for an archer if I understand you correctly... equiped with a longbow and with only 20 STR for an armor and the rest of it 50-50 between dex and cunning... or maybe other ratio between the last two?

Also, I did not understand this part of your post... can you clarify a little, if you have time?

bri193 wrote...

If playing a fighter class pure archer, at least you can gain some benefit early game from both STR and DEX. However, since I have never played this type of character, I have no idea how viable this is mid to late game. I suspect lots of DEX, similar to STR for a rogue class, will be a waste of attribute points in the long run. There is no fighter attribute that swaps DEX for STR like the rogue Lethality that swaps STR for DEX.

Modifié par Marko GW, 16 juillet 2010 - 11:18 .

[ncknck]

imho there is no reason to go above 16 cun on an archer. Except for lockpicking. high dex also additionally affects damage, because hitting every shot is twice as much damage as hitting every second shot. Persuade can be maxed with skills. what else is cun needed for.

[atheelogos]

Marko GW wrote...

So I wanna go for an archer my next playthrough and I keep getting mixed messages reading various posts on the forum?

So can anyone explain what is going on with the dex bug? 

Is there a point in making an archer, are there other workarounds on this issue? 

The last I read was: 

Daggers get bonus damage solely from strength (exactly the same as other melee weapons).  This is a bug.
Bows (shortbows and longbows) get 50% strength + 50% dexterity.  They're working exactly the way they should.
Crossbows get no bonus damage from attributes at all.  This is also a bug--they're supposed to get bonus damage solely from dexterity.

Is this true?

Listen to me. I was in your shoes just a few weeks ago. I decided to go through with it and make an archer. It starts out kinda slow but it was well worth it. I though mages were the strongest class but I was very wrong. Despite all the bugs in the archer's build that class is by far the strongest.

Just follow everything in this link and you should be fine.dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Archery:_An_Efficient_Approach

[Sidney]

bri193 wrote...
I agree with the previous posts on this. Just want to add, pulling a longbow string does indeed take strength. English longbow men were a 'special' force. They were more than just your bog-standard archers. If you play any RTS games set during the time, building/recruiting longbowmen always takes more resources and effort than basic archers. There is a reason for this.

Also, arming a powerful xbow takes strength, and so does holding/aiming the damn thing. Don't confuse a proper medieval xbow with modern ones built with composite materials, or those little one-handed things you see actors waving about in films.

I agree that these aren't toys and are not analogous to modern weapons but, while each proportional increase in force can make a sword hit bigger that isn't true of a crossbow or a longbow. If you can load it, you can fire it and at that point strength no longer matters - especially on a scorssbow which became widespread precisely because it didn't require the strength and training of the longbow.

I could see having a STR pre-req on the bows but there only damage gain should be from your aiming skills.

[ladydesire]

The stronger you are, the longer you can take to aim the bow to be certain to hit the target in a critical spot, which will do more damage; at least this is the way it is in the real world. That's probably why the strength bonus is given like it is; I'd actually like to see Longbows get a different split of damage bouses; 25% from Dexterity (they are less easily stabilized than a shortbow) and 75% Strength.

[BlackCloudX]

I'm an archer in the real world. Heavier draw bows (requiring greater strength) allow more forgiveness when you misjudge range (faster arrows shoot a flatter trajectory), but have the trade off of being less forgiving on a bad release--in laymens terms, your up and down accuracy improves, but left-right accuracy decreases.



Constitution in the real world improves your steadiness from fatigue. Strength improves your steadiness when using very heavy bows. Cunning helps in knowing exactly where to aim and assist in timing. Dexterity helps with your body being able to reproduce the same motion every time. I would go even further as to say willpower contributes heavily in combating target panic (losing the ability to release the bow string, over-aiming, shooting before you are done aiming, mental inability to put the arrow on the target, anticipating the release, etc.)-->epic misses. Over 90% of expert archers experience target panic.



And I think Ladydesire meant to say that longbows are easier to stabilize than shortbows (larger moment-of-inertia)--this is why competition archers prefer longer bows and put heavy stabilizers (weights) on their bows. Shortbows are also more unforgiving due to the difficulty to make a clean release (because they pinch the fingers due to the sharper angle the bowstrings make at full draw). Bow hunters like Shortbows because they are more convenient; they don't get caught on brush as often and are lighter to travel with.

[Aidunno]

As someone who used to shoot a longbow in reenactment I would say that in combat archery, a lot of the shot is "instinctive". Nock, draw, loose, NOT nock, draw, aim, loose. The aim is part of the draw, or if it does exist, you hardly notice. There's a lot of difference between combat archery where you have to judge range and target movement (possibly having to move yourself to avoid incoming projectiles) and hitting a static target at a known range where you can stay stationary. Believe me, even using max 30lb draw weight bows (at users draw length) and using rubber game blunted arrows, you soon learn that pausing to aim for any length of time is not a good idea and doesn't improve your shot when archers are shooting at one another. So I would ignore aiming stats for longbows. Strength, as has been mentioned before does make a lot of difference.



The longbow does have a fearsome reputation but you must remember, english medieval archers began training at the age of about seven. It was law that people had to train and indeed it wasn't that long ago that a soldier could be excused church parade to "practice at the butts". The longbow was a combat weapon whereas the shortbow, as has already been mentioned by BlackCloudX, tended to be used for hunting. Here the idea was/is to get close to your prey. You are after a one shot kill so you get close to your target and don't miss. This doesn't easily lend itself to gameplay.



The main advantage of the crossbow was that it could be used by anybody, it could release at a "draw weight" far greater than a bow and could be kept cocked. The disadvantage was that it was slow to load, often using a mechanical method (e.g. a windlass), and was generally more cumbersome. Strength was not really a requirement although when strength was used it would not give the same benefit as with a normal bow.



My thoughts then:

Crossbows should be more 100% dexterity / 25% Strength (slow rate of fire)

Longbow 25% Dexterity/ 75% Strength

Shortbow 25% Cunning / 50% Dexterity (simulates the creep to target aspect although not what you actually do in game before each shot).



I'd really like to get rid of shortbows and longbows and just call them "bows" which would simplify things.



You can argue round and round however. It is not really possible to accurately portray the effect of bows in an RPG such as dragon age and any "stat bonus" can only be a generalisation. Lets face it, get shot with an arrow, a bolt or a bullet, you have a severe trauma in real life.



As a pure point of interest, I believe the last time a person was killed in combat by a longbow was at Dunkirk in World War II.

[Noir79]

Sorry to add yet another question to the meltin' pot, but here it is: does bows in this game calculate damage from Cunning once you have Lethality, like daggers do?