This is Gallow's house rules: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=166&efcid=3&efidt=318981

He adds one misfortune per level of defending skill (choose one of WS, Resil., Coord.). And allows the use of expertise dice to be added to an attackers pool as challenge dice (purple). I think that's a solid house rule that makes skill a bit more important in defense, while avoiding a boost to the importance of Agi.

The system as written favours the very strong, unskilled (e.g. str 5, WS:0) fighter over the normal strength, superior skilled (e.g. str 3, WS: 2, specialized) when it comes to raw damage output. Assuming that Reckless cleave with a great weapon is used (1 step into reckless stance) vs 1 challenge die and using the dice probability generator ( http://www.jaj22.org.uk/wfrp/diceprob.html ) I can calculate a mean damage for the action. This is 12.9 for the skilled weakling and 14.1 for the unskilled (including the effect of one boon). The number of crits for the skilled fighter is 0.9, but only 0.1 for the unskilled brute*. To be honest I think the low-strength but skilled combatant is the more dangerous opponent here, just based on the much higher chance of getting a crit. He also has a chance (albeit slim) to cause 4 crits in one swing (double comets will cause 3 crits with Reckless cleave, and 1 boon-activated crit).

*note that the numbers are probably slightly boosted in both cases due to the fact that I've treated boons and successes as independent, which they in reality are not. But this is the same for both fighters so should not affect the comparison.

Fresnel said:

Using opposed tests actually makes the problem Naythun has even worse. The low-strength fighter will have even more problems hitting the high-strength guy (has to add two more purple dice than the high strength guy), than in the normal test.

I don't like opposed tests for combat, I think they make the power scaling to steep. Using opposed tests make skills less relevant and abilities even more important than they already are.

If you wanted Skill to dominate opposed tests you would need to revise the table like:

• Opposing Skill Untrained: 0d
• Opposing Skill less than Active Skill: 1d
• Opposing Skill equal to Active Skill: 2d
• Opposing Skill greater than Active Skill: 3d

But, WFRP3 is an attribute centric system. Trying to counter that is swimming against the tide.

In any case, I proposed 'opposed tests' only in the case of an Active Defence being played. In which case it is only Str vs Str when a Parry card is played. Block would be Str vs Tou and Dodge Str vs Agi.

As Fresnel said, make it an opposed check. I'd probably suggest counting each rank of training in WS difference as one more Stat for the purposes of determining opposed difficulty.

Thus, St3 + WS trained is even with a St 4 no-WS trained. Training is helpful, but even training has problems overcoming sheer physical/statistical superiority.

As far as Agi adding to defense, there have been many discussions about this in other topics. Some good "real world" examples have been given. However, I will also just point out it is a matter of game balance as well. Making AGI do double duty as both Ranged Attack *and* Defense (not to mention Initiative) makes it a super-stat. Archers have a field day, as they can hit well and do lots of damage with their high Ag, as well as being nigh-unhittable in melee due to their extremely high Ag. The game strives for some balance. Hence the Active Defenses, and one for each stat. I mean, Block isn't necessarily "realistically" based on someone's Toughness. It could easily be based on Strength, for example. However, it made a good sense for game balance to have an active defense for each of the three physical stats.

Don't forget, St is not just physical lifting/carrying, but also represents natural/untrained skill and ability using melee weapons, including maneuvering to strike. Ag represents general dodging, but also fine manipulation/hand-eye coordination. They are broad categories. So, close-quarters "dodging", barring an extreme effort (ie using the dodge active defense) could fall under the category of Strength.

Well we are playing combat as opp. str vs agi and its working really nice for us. One important thing to consider is that non tougness classes with little armor dies from one reckless cleave or thunderous blow or just 2 normal hits. And if its easy (1d) check they are going to be hit every time. So with this modification melee agility classes have some chance of staying in combat and doing somthing as they will be harder to hit. Also we implemented (I think its Sunatet's idea, sorry if I'm wrong) opposed check rule that you take half of your craracteristic in purple dies and halfs in blacks. We only made it that you can choose if it suits you in that moment. With this we dont have situatons when opposed check is same with 6 vs 3 stats and 6 vs 5 stats, it would be 1p and 2p 1b respectively. I know that a guy with 5 stat would have better defence card but with this high probability rates it just dont make any difference.

Sephirotth said:

Geekoo's idea

I'm just using it

Sephirotth said:

I'll stress again that I think this is a *really* bad idea. Why is agility more important at preventing being hit in melee than, say, swordsmanship? It's just as feasible that a fighter with great skill could avoid being hit with barely moving. You make the 5 Ag archer way too powerful, and make Agility too important a stat. It already affects ranged to-hit, ranged damage, and initiative. Now you add on to your defense too?

I do not recommend this house rule at all. No offense. Better agility is represented by the Dodge line of Active Defenses. Use them.

If you are going to make attack rolls an opposed check, then you should consider lowering the base Wound Threshold. The current value is set assumes you will be hit more often. Otherwise, combat is going to draaaaag.

dvang said:

Well if you look at some other systems like for example GURPS which is accepted as one of "most realistic" system there you have weapon skill which is derived from your agility. Your parrying therefore is directly substracted from your agility. I am just saying that imo chances to be hit depends on your agility. Do you have armor to prevent that damage is different story and I'm working some math to put some limitation on how much can you benefit from you agility while wearing different kinds of armor. As I stated people with high agility usually have little toughness and low armor and they die really fast. And by die I mean permanently as one thunderous blow can kill that type of character instantly. I know agility have lots of usages as it is now but there is also one more problem. High toughness character can close distance from which ranged character can shoot in instant and hes done for. My friend Leondegrance simulated more than 200 fights and ranged characters didn't stand a chance against most melee classes which wear armour. With shield included, ranged character killed himself with fatuigue from generating 2 banes every round. And they were always starting at long/extreme range.

So my point is that as things stand now ranged characters are underpowered and that 5 ag archer just dont stand chance against any melee character with reasonable stats and equipment. With this he can hope to do something if he's also taken some melee cards. Without this that archer is going to die against any monster/NPC intelligent enough to chase him first. And he cant outrun that monster/NPC. Simulations prove what I'm saying now. And that fighter with great skill that is barely moving and avoiding being hit have great agility imo. Agility is also eye/hand coordination which is extremely important at swordfighting and can let you intercept incoming blow. That is why I dont approve parry being strength derived but I can understand developers intention to equally assign defenses to all stats.

Doc, the Weasel said:

Also we are using 12 points starting system so you cant have all stats high. You will lack in something be it strength, agility and toughness. Not to mention nightmare of leaving all mental stats at 2. So instead of 85+ chance to hit we aimed at 50-60% taken the opponents are equally skilled. There were no drags in combat because of this change. Only dragging that sometimes occurs is when dwarf soldier with towershield, breastplate and lots of toughness is left on the battlefield against couple of monsters. They do him mostly 1 wound and it takes him 5-6 rounds to dispatch them. Outside of that combat flows really fast and is bloody and satisfying. At least for my group.

I am just saying that imo chances to be hit depends on your agility.

Well, that's certainly you're perogative to think so. However, in WFRP your weaponskill is based on Strength and not Agility. This is not <shudder> GURPS. So, note that St in WFRP is not merely brute force, but also represents finesse and skill with hand-held weapons.

As I stated people with high agility usually have little toughness and low armor and they die really fast. And by die I mean permanently as one thunderous blow can kill that type of character instantly.

Well, high St characters are in exactly the same boat. The only stat that would help with this is Toughness, which any PC can (and probably should) take, even if you're not a front-line fighter. Although, keep in mind, that no enemy can kill a PC in one blow. Really powerful opponents *might* get lucky and knock a PC unconscious with a single hit, if their To is 2 or 3 and they've got low starting Wounds (like they are an Elf). Otherwise, you're looking at at least 2 solid hits to knock someone out. Remember, PCs are only killed if they are unconscious and have a number of criticals >= their To. So, anyway, nothing is stopping a player from making a high-ag high-to character. If they choose to make their PC low To, that's their fault, not a fault of the game.

High toughness character can close distance from which ranged character can shoot in instant and hes done for. My friend Leondegrance simulated more than 200 fights and ranged characters didn't stand a chance against most melee classes which wear armour. With shield included, ranged character killed himself with fatuigue from generating 2 banes every round. And they were always starting at long/extreme range.

Well...
1) The game isn't about 1v1 encounters unless you're running a solo game.
2) There are some pretty deadly ranged actions, which have been mentioned on the boards.
3) Nothing says high-Agi PCs cannot wear heavy armor too, or have high To. If a melee PC can have high To, and wear armor, so can a high-Ag PC.
4) How/why was the ranged PC generating 2 banes each round? That's a lot of bad luck in rolling, considering the number of positive dice being rolled. If anything, the ranged guy should be able to make the melee guy gain fatigue.

So my point is that as things stand now ranged characters are underpowered and that 5 ag archer just dont stand chance against any melee character with reasonable stats and equipment.

I disagree that they are underpowered, although again, we're normally not talking about 1v1 combats. WFRP is a group game.

Without this that archer is going to die against any monster/NPC intelligent enough to chase him first.

Entirely Debatable

And he cant outrun that monster/NPC.

Sure he can. If he isn't allowed an attempt to flee, then that sounds like a problem with the GM.

Simulations prove what I'm saying now.

I haven't seen anything proving anything

For example, you do realize that an archer can use their free maneuver to disengage to Close range, and then shoot, right? This also forces the melee enemy to use their free maneuver in order to engage. Now, add in a second friendly PC, who is melee oriented, and the melee PC ties up the enemy in melee so they can't engage the archer without gaining a fatigue, etc. There are also a lot of RP and combat situations where ranged attacks are extremely valuable. So, yeah, I totally disagree that ranged PCs are underpowered or otherwise need to be able to outmelee melee PCs (which is what you're suggesting).

First,you dont have race that gives you toughness+agility and you have dwarf(str+tou).Also there is only one career i think that have agi+tou and you have several with str+tou,So it much more easier to get high str+high tou than agi+tou.As well by wearing heavy armour you need encumbearence and str is providing you that,not agility.So its kinda hard to have character that have high toughness,agility and wearing heavy armour.Str based character will have heavier armor,thats it.

Second.Yea i simulated many many many fights and melee clasees easily beats ranged.But as you said its not 1vs1 game,its a group game.And yea,4 agility character will kill himself by attacking heavy armoured tank who is just standing and doing guarded position or nothing.As you know you can block range attacks.Dont know do you have any house rules thou or playing just by book.We have some house rules,most taken from ppl here,which proves much much better than original.We are using rule with different chaos star effect,and we are adding misfortune dice for every range increment for example which makes difference as well.

Third.Its not entireley debatable.Clever NPC will run to range first and demolish him.Otherwise range will stand there and do loads of dmg to other characters away from danger.So i agree every clever mob or NPC will run to him first instead of loosing rounds trying to kill heavy tank or somethin.

Fourth.How he can run away if he have worse toughness?

Leondgorance said:

While I can just about make out what most of your post is trying to say I am not clear what this means. Kill himself?

You know rule when you get fatigue equal to twice your toughness+1 yoo fell unconcious?Not literally kill but you loose fight.And you know rule when you get 2 banes on physical attack you get 1 fatigue?Guess you know what i mean now?

Leondgorance said:

I can safely say that I have never seen a skilled archer character suffer this kind of fate, constantly getting 2 banes on your rolls to this extent just doesn't happen. What actions is this guy using against this tank character to suffer what must be severe penalties?

Well depends on rules you are using also.You are playing totally by the book or?You have any house rules that have any connection with this situation?For example we are counting chaos star as chaos star+challenge+reroll,which means on card where you dont have chaos star effect bane+challenge+reroll.We have house rule for range shooting as well.One misfortune die for every range increment which is normal imo,its not same to shoot at some1 from 5m or 40m.I was using sniper shoot and rapid fire mostly.Those 2 are best range cards imo.

And its not constanly,it happenes once in 2 or 3 rolls or somethin like that.Point is that even when archer hits,he inflicts 1 dmg so he needs like 15-18 successive shots to kill heavy armored tank.

And by skilled archer you mean?

A chaos star = a challenge, a bane and a re-roll.... ouch! No wonder your experience seems to be different to others.

There is an archer in the party I gm for - he has never collapsed due to fatigue, and is commonly (using things like sniper shot and the like) bringing down enemy before they get into combat (or at least damaging the big ones enough to make them easier to deal with.)

We're playing the rules as written out of the box.

I will admit that unless he gets a critical a normal shot does not do great damage( 5 for the long bow, and 3 for agil = 8, and once soak etc is taken off...), but he certainly is a pain in my ***** as far as getting monsters into HtH with the group go when he's got his action cards in play.

@ Leondgorance

First,you dont have race that gives you toughness+agility and you have dwarf(str+tou).Also there is only one career i think that have agi+tou and you have several with str+tou,So it much more easier to get high str+high tou than agi+tou.

Sure, but it doesn't mean its impossible. My point, though, is if you make Ag = Defense, then there is no need to wear armor. So, a ranged PC could leave St at 2 and be better at melee defense than a St4 + armor PC, which doesn't make sense.

Second.Yea i simulated many many many fights and melee clasees easily beats ranged.But as you said its not 1vs1 game,its a group game.And yea,4 agility character will kill himself by attacking heavy armoured tank who is just standing and doing guarded position or nothing.As you know you can block range attacks.

I would check your strategies and actions selected for your ranged PC. For example, Knockback Shot is a must for a ranged PC who thinks they'll get into 1v1 encounters. Second, as others have posted, I'm not sure how you mean they will "kill themselves" attacking a heavily armored tank. If a tank is just sitting there doing guarded position, it's even BETTER, since he isn't forcing the archer to move at all. Sure, you can block ranged attacks, you can dodge them too. Know what, you can block, dodge, AND parry melee attacks ... so ranged attacks have 1 fewer active defenses that can be used against them.

Dont know do you have any house rules thou or playing just by book.

I play by the book, and it works fine.

We have some house rules,most taken from ppl here,which proves much much better than original.We are using rule with different chaos star effect,and we are adding misfortune dice for every range increment for example which makes difference as well.

Well, there is part of it. Your house rules are penalizing ranged attacks. Personally, I wouldn't penalize ranged attacks unless firing into melee, or firing at long/extreme ranges. It's obviously debateable whether the house rules you're using "prove much much better than original". It might play better for you and your group. My group plays by the book rules, and they work just fine for us.

Third.Its not entireley debatable.Clever NPC will run to range first and demolish him.

I'm sorry, but it is debateable. First, you assume that the NPC is able to get to the archer. What if the archer is on a roof, across an obstacle, the NPC is already engaged in melee with the archer's buddy, etc. That's why I keep mentioning that the game isn't about 1v1. Give the archer a melee buddy, and it becomes much more dangerous and difficult to "take out" the archer. Regardless, the archer merely needs to spend his free maneuver to disengage back to Close range, then shoot his bow again ... forcing the melee guy to use a maneuver to engage again ... repeat and rinse. Yes, the archer will have a slightly tougher time, with less armor. He's supposed to. The balance is that the ranged character can attack in situations where the melee PC cannot, such as from a roof, or across an obstacle, etc

Fourth.How he can run away if he have worse toughness?

What does toughness have to do with running away? Once the archer decides to flee permanently, the game goes into Story mode (assuming no other combat is going on) and a chase sequence ensues (or doesn't, if he isn't followed).

You know rule when you get fatigue equal to twice your toughness+1 yoo fell unconcious?Not literally kill but you loose fight.And you know rule when you get 2 banes on physical attack you get 1 fatigue?Guess you know what i mean now?

And 2 boons recovers a fatigue. There is also Asses The Situation action which can recover fatigue. I'm not sure how this matters, though. Keep in mind, that just because 2 banes are rolled, does not mean the PC automatically gets a fatigue point. Just like boons, bane effects are selected. 2 banes could cause a fatigue, but they might instead be used to activate a bane line on an action card. It won't do both.

For example we are counting chaos star as chaos star+challenge+reroll

Ouch! That's pretty harsh, especially considering there's a 1 in 8 chance (assuming 1 <P>) with every roll. That will increase the difficulty of ALL actions. I'm not sure why it would affect archers more than melee though. Unless, of course, you're applying your 2-bane = fatigue reasoning. My impression (and I could be wrong) from your post was that you are automatically applying 1 fatigue should 2 banes be rolled. Most often, 2-banes trigger on the action card rather than the fatigue gain. It would normally take 4 banes in a roll to give a fatigue, which is extremely unlikely using the actual rules ... although the odds definitely increase using your house rules b/c of the chaos star counting as a bane as well as being rerolled. It sounds like a lot of your difficulty with ranged is due to your house rules, not the game rules.

Point is that even when archer hits,he inflicts 1 dmg so he needs like 15-18 successive shots to kill heavy armored tank.

Keep in mind that an archer does the exact same amount of damage that a melee PC does. The rules are the same.
St + DR + (action card bonuses) = Damage total
Ag + DR + (action card bonuses) = Damage total

A Hand weapon is DR 5. A Shortbow is DR 5. (Also, consider that gunpowder weapons and Longbows get the Piercing ability, ignoring some armor too).
So, the only variables, really, are the Action cards. Admittedly, there are a couple melee action cards that have more total +damage effect lines than the ranged actions (like Trollfeller Strike). Then again, ranged actions can be done from Long range. The majority of attack action cards, however, are pretty similar in damage output between melee and ranged.

Okay than...

First.How you imagine that ranged will be better at melee defense than heavy armored tank?Just do mats plz,no chance.First and most important ranged will have only one defense and melee will have two what is enormous difference.He will have one purple more,true.But will have like 5-6 misfortune less what is huuuuuuge difference.

Second.I used best ranged cards ofc,otherwise there wouldnt be point in simulating.You have talent that gives you option to parry ranged attacks as well,so no,there is no difference with active defences at all.

Third.Okay you play how it suits you best.But by the book its even more easier for melee vs ranged 1vs1,fight is over after like one successfull hit.

Fourth.We are not penalizing actually,we are boosing ranged.They get like one missfortune die for attack but get like one purple for defending,so its kinda boost,not penalty.

Fifth.Well positions are also debatable than.You can have melee with huge fire ballista on hill that would kill 100 archers in one hit.I am talking about fair fight here 4vs4 or 5vs on battlefield.Give melee buddy another melee buddy and then you will see how ranged+melee will finish.He gets free maneuver when he get 2 boons if i am correct.That will occur very rarely tbh.

Sixth.Why goes into story mode.That makes no sense.If in that moment archer had like 5 fatigue and melee 2 why should that go in story mode?Its still combat mode and those two are using there toughness power,skills etc to run away.Trust me,that way archer will collapse faster due to fatigue,what is logical.

Seventh and Eight.True,and most cards have worse effect on 2 banes thatn fatigue,so its best option for archer to take.Btw,with some attacks,sniper shoot for example,you get fatigue on 1 bane.So if by any chance archer role 3 banes on that attack,its 2 fatigues in one attack. No,not at all.Our house rules only improve ranged characters in battle,as i told you before why.With core set rules,if GM is playing melee NPC clever enough,archers will live one round,two if extremely lucky.

Ninth.True,rules are same for both melee and ranged.BUT,best melee cards do ALOT more dmg than ranged.For example,take Reckless cleave.With core rules its pretty easy to get full effect of that card.3 hammers+boon.Thats 18dmg in one hit.With 1hammer+boon its 16dmg.Archer down in one hit.All philosophy.

Tenth.Would love to play with you one campaign,to check out how it would work,cause we got some different opinions

I think we've got a slight disconnect.

First.How you imagine that ranged will be better at melee defense than heavy armored tank?Just do mats plz,no chance.

I agree, he won't have better melee defense than a heavily armored tank. My point is that he *shouldn't*. By having Ag affect defensive ability, like you are suggesting, in fact *you* are advocating that the archer should have as much (if not more) defense than a heavy armored tank.

But will have like 5-6 misfortune less what is huuuuuuge difference.

Where are you getting 5-6 misfortune dice difference from?

Second.I used best ranged cards ofc,otherwise there wouldnt be point in simulating.You have talent that gives you option to parry ranged attacks as well,so no,there is no difference with active defences at all.

We have a difference in opinion of what the "best" ranged cards are, though. Here's a hint ... it's not always the card that does the most potential damage. Second, it's rare that a character, let alone an NPC, will have the talent that lets them parry ranged attacks. It also inflicts 1 fatigue each time it is used. There's also a tactic that add [bB] to Defense for a Dodge, and one that gives +1 Defense as long as you don't have an active defense recharging. So ... the archer has talents to help his defense out too. With the fatigue cost, that melee guy won't be able to parry very many shots before he starts taking negatives (and then risks going unconscious).

Fourth.We are not penalizing actually,we are boosing ranged.They get like one missfortune die for attack but get like one purple for defending,so its kinda boost,not penalty.

Sure, you are only slightly penalizing their attacks, while significantly boosting their defense to a level higher than melee combatants can get. Which, IMO is wrong and unneccessary.

Sixth.Why goes into story mode.That makes no sense.If in that moment archer had like 5 fatigue and melee 2 why should that go in story mode?Its still combat mode and those two are using there toughness power,skills etc to run away.Trust me,that way archer will collapse faster due to fatigue,what is logical.

Because this is an RPG and a story, and that's the way the game works. As a GM, when an opponent flees the combat for good, he uses a maneuver to disengage, then ducks out of sight as quickly as possible. If the archer has 5 fatigue, then he's fatigued and is going to have penalties making his checks to try to run away during the chase (typically athletics checks). Granted, if the combat is in a big wide-open area, he'll probably get caught or run-down (in story mode, typically) fairly quickly and easily. If there is any place for him to duck out of sight, though, it's a chase as he tries to lose his persuers. That's entirely logical and realistic.

Seventh and Eight.True,and most cards have worse effect on 2 banes thatn fatigue,so its best option for archer to take.Btw,with some attacks,sniper shoot for example,you get fatigue on 1 bane.So if by any chance archer role 3 banes on that attack,its 2 fatigues in one attack.

Sure, but it's probably better for the archer to shoot using Conservative, rather than reckless. Most do. In that case, it takes 2 banes to cause a stress. Add in the fact that its much easier to roll banes in Reckless Stance than Conservative, as well as gaining fatigue just from the Reckless dice, and you'll see it's not common to get a lot of fatigue on Conservative hence the reason more archers use the Conservative stance.

No,not at all.Our house rules only improve ranged characters in battle,as i told you before why.With core set rules,if GM is playing melee NPC clever enough,archers will live one round,two if extremely lucky.

You overly improve their melee defense, which is not really needed in a group-oriented game. If your group has a melee PC or two, then any NPCs will likely target them first. I mean, it's more reasonable to attack the guy closest to you and charging you with the big axe, than trying to run past those axe-wielding trollslayer/mercenary to hit the elf in the back. Now, enemy archers might find shooting at PC archers reasonable, or if the PC melee fighters just hang back and let the NPC melee fighters get in close to the PC archer, sure I could see targeting the lighter armorerd archer first. Guess the archer should have hung back more, or will need to move, or have the PC melee fighter (or the archer) knock the NPC melee down/back. You know, team effort.

My point is that archers are, generally, supposed to be a bit squishier than armored melee fighters. So are wizards. It is not broken because they are. Archers have enough bonuses if you play to their strengths. If your archer is shooting arrows from a balcony/roof, what is that NPC melee fighter going to do, for example? Running away is about his only option. It's true in every game, RPG or miniature ... people with ranged attacks almost always are squishier than people with only melee attacks. Melee attackers can only survive to get in close by layering up on armor and hoping to live through the ranged attacks they must suffer before getting (if they can) into melee combat range. It's part of the natural order of things. Why allow the ranged folks to also be harder to hit/damage than someone skilled in melee combat and wearing lots of armor?

Remember, interpreting Chaos Star results is left to the fiat of the GM and players. A Chaos star: If there is no other effect triggered by a chaos star, it counts as a bane. It is NOT a house rule to rule the make a Chaos Star counts as 1 fail, twenty fails, or a flat out YOU FAILED! It is up to the GM to decide if it has another effect than one listed on the card. Remember, when cards with mulitple boons/banes, the GM or player can choose the effect they want to have happen, period.

Secondly, 2 banes do not always equal 1 stress. It is a universal rule, but you choose one effect. All banes/boon/delay effects have room for GM fiat. The default effects are triggered if x amount of boons/banes are rolled but these are not THE ONLY effects that can be triggered. They can have a narrative or other mechanical impact as well.

There is an example I've been trying to find where it is mentioned in a manual that a guy rolls a successful, conservative sneak check with an hour glass to sneak passed some guards and save the guy behind the door. Because of the hourglass, they end up successfully sneaking past the guards, but end up getting there to late as the person behind the door is killed. This gives a much broader definition of the potential of the symbols as it is an effect that is a far cry from lost initiative space or an extra recharge token. It is fine to interpret these symbols in new and interesting ways. I have counted hourglasses as a fail on a successful roll (not to make the roll fail, but to reduce its effectiveness) and as a bane on a successful roll, as the archer was too slow preparing his shot (or having trouble loading or waited to long) and the shot comes out not as well as they hoped. This is completely in my power to do so by the RAW of the system because the GM can make up conditions, on the fly, to be triggered by the effects.

Sorry, I just felt like I should point this out in a debate that seemed to be circling around this point of contention.

Yea,slight discconect definitely

First.I "never" advocated that.I advocated that archer should have better chance to survive,NOT better defense than heavy armored tank.I never wrote anything like that.

Second.Armour,shield,defenses?As i said,melee will have more defenses than archer in HtH combat.

Third.The archer have micro chance to avoid melee attack with core rules.Even with those talentrs you mentioned.

Fourth.As i said million times so far,its not lvl higher than melee combatants can get.Its lvl higher than archer had by rules.

Fifth.About story mode.Every GM has his own way of handling things,true.He can run away if he is really far by getting of a trace,hiding etc.But if melee is near him n the end,he wont run away,in very most of situations.

Sixth.Even worse.He will easier fell unconsious with stress than fatigue as i assume archer will have more toughness than willpower.And,delay symbol is like ten times worse than fatigue,thats my opinion thou.

Seventh.Well i got loads of experience with fights,as you do as well i suppose.And one thing i learned is that if you leave archer doing dmg freely,in the end he will be first on dmg list for sure:)If you have 2 melee guys in battle,i dont see why shouldnt one of them run to archer and instantly kill him,and by core rules its very very very small chance for melee to miss archer.And if he hits...

I see your point Commoner.But dont you think its kinda harsh to use delay symbol that way.You get success but the guy dies.Its very bad situation than.You made successfull roll but failed to save some1 and in situation to have to sneak back again.I agree you should use symbol to lower effectivness,but maybe in some less nasty way:)

Sounds like you should try out the "Immobilizing shot", this will stop one creature from charging for a couple of rounds.

One creature,maybe.But two,definitely not:)

First.I "never" advocated that.I advocated that archer should have better chance to survive,NOT better defense than heavy armored tank.

<shrug> An archer's defense isn't much different than a melee character's. ie, the only change to their chance of being hit is they don't normally wear as heavy armor. This is 1 or 2 at most, and/or 1 or 2 soak at most (generally). Don't get me wrong, it is a difference, but as I pointed it, it *should* be. By allowing Ag to affect their chance of being hit, you are putting an archer's defense on par, or perhaps even better than a melee fighter's. After all, he needs to wear armor and have the penalties and problems that entails, etc. So, while you didn't come out and say it, but allowing Ag to affect defense, you *are* making archer's potentially more adept at defense than a heavily armored melee character.

Second.Armour,shield,defenses?As i said,melee will have more defenses than archer in HtH combat.

And they should. So why would you make Ag = Armor+shield and therefore put the archer's defense on par?

Third.The archer have micro chance to avoid melee attack with core rules.Even with those talentrs you mentioned.

Combat is pretty short in WFRP in general. So yeah, melee PCs have a hard time avoiding being hit too. The archer's chance is only slightly less, depending on circumstances, than a melee PCs. For example, a mail shirt only has a 4 encumberance and provides 1d and 2 soak. A buckler has an encumberance of 2 with 1d. So, for 6 encumberance an archer can get 2d and 2soak. Pretty good defense, not far off most melee unless they are decked out in plate (or gromril) with a tower shield. Considering the encumberance limit of a 3 St character is 15, spending 6 on armor isn't too hard to do and leaving plenty for weapons and other gear.

Fifth.About story mode.Every GM has his own way of handling things,true.He can run away if he is really far by getting of a trace,hiding etc.But if melee is near him n the end,he wont run away,in very most of situations.

Totally your opinion, of course. It's often true as well. However, IMO, an agile enemy, with a knowledge of the local area, could round a corner and know exactly where a hole in a fence is, or alcove, or recessed doorway, or alley, etc, and make it entirely plausible to avoid detection or make it a chase after just a few feet. It happens in the movies all the time ... which is really what WFRP is about. Making the game cinematic and exciting. By forcing combats to always be "fight until dead", or a mechanical "use maneuvers to run away until one side falls from fatigue", I think your game is not in the spirit of the rules, and you are losing out on a lot of fun (not to mention recurring villains, chases to enemy hideouts, dramatic chases through town, etc).

Sixth.Even worse.He will easier fell unconsious with stress than fatigue as i assume archer will have more toughness than willpower.And,delay symbol is like ten times worse than fatigue,thats my opinion thou.

Even worse? How? He won't be getting much stress at all using Conservative dice. Running conservative, you don't gain the extra chances for Fatigue/Stress that the reckless dice give, and have increased chances for successes and boons than a <B> die. Delay can be annoying, sure, but so can the extra fatigue+banes on the reckless dice. It partially depends on what the GM assigns the delay to. Honestly, they two dice types are pretty even.

Seventh.Well i got loads of experience with fights,as you do as well i suppose.And one thing i learned is that if you leave archer doing dmg freely,in the end he will be first on dmg list for sure:)If you have 2 melee guys in battle,i dont see why shouldnt one of them run to archer and instantly kill him,and by core rules its very very very small chance for melee to miss archer.And if he hits...

Well, that is certainly your GM's choice for NPC targets. However, keep in mind that it takes a maneuver to disengage from the melee, and will cost another maneuver to engage the archer (assuming the archer is in close range). Then, he has to hit. Then, it depends on damage rolled. It is rare that a person can be knocked out on a single hit. If you're an elf with no armor and 2 To, but otherwise you take take a hit or two. As I pointed out, and archer can get decent armor protection, just about as good as melee, so he can still be fairly durable. Sure, he won't be as durable as a melee fighter ... but he isn't supposed to be. So, there won't be an "instant kill him". At best 2 rounds for the NPC, more likely 3 or 4, meanwhile the trollslayer bashed his buddy and is coming for him.

I guess part of it is GM style. For whatever reason, your GM wants to target archers first in an unrealistic (IMO) way, making their survival more difficult. As an archer in that game, then, your positioning becomes crucial. Always take the high ground, put obstacles between you and enemies to slow them down. I'd invest in caltrops, etc. and throw them in front of my position. Keep in mind the terrain, and have your melee folks engage at choke points, so enemies *can't* get past them to come at the archer. And so on. It might even be good to invest in WS and improved Defense cards. Wear some armor. Etc. As a GM, I disagree that archers are the prime target, or are the most immediately dangerous (it does depend on the situation). Most NPCs, especially when they're already engaged in melee, won't leave melee, ignoring the trollslayer, in order to go run after the archer. The trollslayer is there in front of them, bigger than life, and is the most dangerous target to them at that time. It sounds to me like your GM is "meta-gaming", rather than roleplaying the NPCs.

In essence ... The rules aren't broken. My advice is to use tactics to protect your archer, and don't change the rules to make archers more powerful.