A new archery feat

[COGATO]

I was sitting around thinking about the aspects of archery and I came up with an idea. When an arrow is shot at a target, either it misses and no harm is done to the intended target, or it hits and damage is taken, but what I was thinking about would add a little more to this situation. What if when an arrow strikes a target, depending on the size of the target, the skill of the archer, and the area in which the target was hit, what if the victim were to be knocked down, hindering them from the all immediate run away quickly while I have an arrow lodged in my throat. It adds a bit of realism to the game and puts a little more depth into the idea of using archery as a hunting and military tactic. I have never had a truly skilled archer and this may already be implemented, but from what I have seen the game still lacks this aspect of realism which I think would truly add to the value of a good bowman.

[Yasbusta]

Now I am not sure if this was left out on purpose or just never thought about. Trying not to be ic sensitive it has already been thought about, if a different aspect. Maybe the imms wanted it to be left out on purpose but I think it would be a great idea. Archery is so understate in the game in my oppinion.

Just my tidbit

Yasbusta

I like this idea, and maybe it could be affected by what type of arrow as well.  Like a heavy stone sheaf arrow might knock you around more than a wooden flight arrow.  On the same topic though, if arrows can knock a fellow down, why not simple melee hits, especially blunt weapons?  I think a good sized club wielded by a mul or HG would knock most people a couple meters around if used corectly, heh.  I suppose you can try to reflect this through the bash skill, but if arrows can get a knockdown, bludegoning weapons ought to have their chance too.

[Lazloth]

I voted no, as archery is so incredibly overpowered right now, manipulating the victim's position would amplify a mode of combat that requires attention on other levels.  Should some of the other issues with the skill come to be addressed, this would make a nice addition.

[Carnage]

Several points to address.

#1: Your poll is twisted and meaningless. You only put down the answers you want to hear.

#2: Knocking people down is in game. I won't spoil where or what, but you can knock people down with skills, besides bash.

#3: Archery is already overpowered as is. When a hit to the wrist can do fourty damage to someone, well, I don't think you need to be able to knock them down, not to mention that when you get good at archery there's just about no delay.

#4: Code-wise, I can hit you in game with a warhammer in the head several times, and you won't die. There's a balance between realism and gameplay. The fact that you want archery to be pretty much an insta-kill skill that can not only do massive HP damage but disable someone is a joke and destroys the balance of the game.

Yasbusta, you're new to the game. When you play more you'll come to realize that many people know how good of a skill archery is. The only problem is that it's hard to raise and very expensive.

Archery is already on thin enough ice. I wouldn't suggest trying to make it more powerful, especially considering the level of damage it can do now.

I think Yasbusta said in another thread that he's been playing a while.

On topic though, I voted yes. Since last I knew, the throw skill knocked someone down. Good god, the -throw- skill, knocked someone down. 2 day warrior with average strength tossing knives and knocking -duskhorn- onto their ass. If this has since changed, I change my vote to no.

[Carnage]

On topic though, I voted yes. Since last I knew, the throw skill knocked someone down. Good god, the -throw- skill, knocked someone down. 2 day warrior with average strength tossing knives and knocking -duskhorn- onto their ass. If this has since changed, I change my vote to no.

You can also hurl axes or javelins at people, you know.

Those should knock things down, but then at least take the ability away from these little knives. The largest I've seen these things described is perhaps just over half a cord, 10 inches at the most.

[Yasbusta]

Me new no way, new, bah I bet that i have been playing longer than most of the player base, I just meant that archery for what it is it isn't as good as I think it should be in the game, from hunting experience, but if you want to think that over 7 years playing is new then go ahead

Yasbusta

[House Rising Sun]

Arrows probably hurt.

I imagine the pain of it could bring some people to their knees. But they're not gonna go flying or even be pushed over Xena-style.

I'd think, without really considering the idea much, that before arrows or knives or throwing axes are going to be knocking people down, melee combat should be doing it. Now it's a stretch and definitely not the best way to approach the problem, but here's what I'm thinking: We have stun, we have stamina, why not a less visible value to represent balance or your pcs balanceability being based on...

Eh, screw that. Halfway through typing it I wake up and realize how it wouldn't fit into arm's combat system. Perhaps particularly strong attacks, or a certain number of successful consecutive attacks knocking a person down if they fail a bash test or something. But either way, arrows should not be downing people any more than hammers and the like.

[Carnage]

Me new no way, new, bah I bet that i have been playing longer than most of the player base, I just meant that archery for what it is it isn't as good as I think it should be in the game, from hunting experience, but if you want to think that over 7 years playing is new then go ahead

You sure act like you are. I don't think anyone doubts the power of archery. It's an incredible skill. Like I said, when you can do 40 damage to someone by hitting them in the wrist with an arrow, you've got a pretty fucking powerful skill. I'd place it next to backstab, damage-wise.

[halfbreed]

Archery can be very powerful as-is, no need for change.

I'd MUCH rather see a decent way of practicing archery without having to spend a billion sid... and having to shoot at critters for practice.  A practice dummy or target, basically.

It's probably one of the most bugs-me-in-the-back-of-my-mind type things about the code, ever since my newbie days years ago...  the fact that there's no real way of working at becoming a master marksman without actually shooting at a critter.

(Though I'd be cool with say, allowing archery only to increase to a certain point via shooting at still targets, then get the top levels of mastery only by shooting at live targets.)

[COGATO]

I put down posatives and negatives to this post to vote on, I cant help the fact that I didnt think of every possible response a person could have to this idea and put it as a voteable topic. If you want no, put no one cares about my ideas, if you are if'y put it dosent make a difference, or that it might have some application, and if your gung-ho put yes, if you it really hurts you deep down that I didnt put what you were thinking in the options then go write up a new pole about it and make sure to get every bodys point of view on voteable topics through PM's so that no one can complain. (Thanks)

As for archery being a really powerful skill. Like I said I have never had a succsessful archery so I wouldnt know, but what I do know is that archery is incredibly hard to get even decent at it, not only because the learning curve is very steep but because without fletchery its very very expensive, and even with fletchery, fletchery is one of the hardest skills to perfect I have ever seen (Hope that not to ic) and even after its been perfected just trying to fill one quiver can be very time consuming. So to be decent at archery and not spend RL years perfecting your skills you have to have a character that learns from his mistakes quickly, have numerous hours a day to play your character, and have resources readily available to you or have some knowledge of where to come about the resources you need. So I think that if someone wants to devote that much time and effort to perfecting a skill such as archery then after they finally get really good at it then they should very well be able to knock someone on thier butt with their extremely skilled shot, kinda reeping the fruits of your labor. As for knocking off 40 hp a shot, you may be right, but most people haul major A** after the first hit even through that large sheaf head arrow is lodged in their throat. Oh well, Im sure I missed some vital point in this whole rant, but, it was an idea on a saturday evening, cut me some slack cocheese.

[COGATO]

I like your idea halfbreed, and especially the part about only being able to get so good off of shooting still targets, it really gives those akin with the use of a bow a place in houses and military applications, but still keeps a spot open for that lone devoted ranger that has spent his life with a bow.

I know that some organizations (You all probably know who just didnt want to give away ic info) actually have practice dummys for the purpose of archery training, I just hope that this organization isnt training uber archers by only putting them against still targets.

[Delirium]

With a little thought, planning, and the right combination of skills and supplies (either your own or with the help of others) a single good archer could likely take out someone much more powerful than them with one successful shot. No, not killing someone with one shot. But I'll leave it at that.

Archery, used effectively and with the right sort of planning, is an incredibly powerful and dangerous skill. That, I imagine, is one of the main reasons it's so difficult to master. Not to mention, from an IC standpoint, supplies for archery -would- be hard to get. Though the level of difficulty depends on location as well. Think about where the supplies you'd need to make arrows would be easier to get and there you go.

[Guest]

Yes, I agree with you, being in the right terrain does help out alot with supplies, but it still takes time and most of the time travel to different locations to gather the supplies needed. Then time to craft the arrows after usually traveling to three different locations to gather the supplies needed (this is if you buy your feathers instead of harvest them which is increasingly hard because the amount of creatures with useable feathers is limited and that combined with the chance you may break the feathers or spoil the carcass before you get the feathers from it makes archery, yet again increasingly hard to practice) if you dont buy your feathers then you have another few days of hunting to look foward to before you even have enough feathers to make a substantial amount of arrows, assuming you dont ruin them in the arrow crafting. And if you just buy arrows directly from the shops, your usually looking at around 200 sid to fill one quiver (thats cutting the price in most cases) so to fill a quiver you are still looking at a few days however you look at it. Archery is very hard to master and if you do, you deserve every up you can get for your devotion.

[Hot_Dancer]

The amount of damage a master archer does is -nasty-..being able to knock them down as well. Mass doom.

Hot_Dancer

[deviant storm]

You sure act like you are.

Carnage, what part of NO FLAMING don't you understand? Everyone's entitled to an opinion on the GDB without being personally attacked.

As for archery. I've been shot. Repeatedly. Those sheaf arrows hit hard, and do quite a bit of damage. Especially in conjunction with poisons, etc.
So no, I'm not in favor of being knocked down by an arrow.

[edit: I meant to address the first part of this post to Carnage, not Cogato. My apologies to Cogato for the mistake.]

[gfair]

While arrows in movies will knock all sorts of foul servants of Saruman down except for the one Orc that gets two shots from Legolas and still manages to make it into the culvert to blow up the... wait, ferget it.

It doesn't happen.  A bow will either stick in you, or pass through you.  The idea of knockdown just doesn't fit with it - it's a heavy object with a sharp point, and with sufficient kinetic energy it will pass through.  Without sufficient kinetic energy, it will merely pierce your breastbone.  In any case, it is not designed to impart all its energy without doing damage, it's designed to destroy as many vitals as possible, and that means passthrough.  A blunt arrow may be an option, if the IMMs are willing to consider it.  Blunt spears and throwing maces are known to exist in real life, they would be realistic in Arm as well.

With today's modern compound bows and sophisticated let-off cams, the kinetic energy that a bow can pass to an arrow can be so great that archers report that their arrows have shot into a deer, pierced its breastbone, passed through the chest cavity, and dug deep into the ground beyond.  If that's the kind of capability a bow has when smacking the breastplate, then it is far easier for an arrow to pass clean through a humanoid in any spot other than head.  No knockdown, just pure puncture and passthrough.

I voted yes, but it is unrealistic that knockdown happen on any sharp, armor-piercing arrows - they must be blunt to be realistic.

[COGATO]

Aright, I see your point, a sharp arrow traveling that fast would probably pass straight through. But here is the text you could witness for that.

An arrow flies in from the north striking you in the chest and passes through your upper torso flying out of your back.

You stoically stand upright ignoring the seering pain in your chest and run into the wilds escaping the enemy even though you have a gaping hole in your chest delivering the most incredible pain you have felt in your life.

(Yes I know this isnt the actual text, but by saying the arrow flying straight through you would not cause you to fall or roll on the ground or atleast drop to a knee clutching the area of infliction, not very realistic? That or everyone has the ability to perform incredible feats of mind over matter.)

Ok, so here is the bout....we have....An entire world of superbeings capable of ignoring projectiles passing straight through thier flesh VS People that atleast drop to a knee holding the gaping holes in thier bodys......Place your bets.

[Forest Junkie]

You are a sad, strange little man COGATO...   ... And for that, I tip my hat to you!  

On the topic of this matter, though, I agree in some ways and disagree in others.

To Carnage: I completely agree that master archers can do massive amounts of damage. What's strange, as you've said, is taking 40 damage from a shot to the wrist.  Maybe if there was a way to balance the system, where a wrist shot can only take a max amount of hp, say only 1/8 your total hp, while a perfect head shot is a one kill. (If this is already implemented, don't hurt me, I'm on disability.) It would then, IMHO, make more sense to have this "knockdown" code in effect, as there would be more of a balance on what hurts more and what can knock you down.

Also, take into effect the armor some wear, as others have said. An shard would likely shatter over most types of breastplates, while searing through many types of leather.

All in all, sounds like it would be a 'tok bitch to code. So, in the end, is it worth it? I say maybe

[Carnage]

You sure act like you are.

Carnage, what part of NO FLAMING don't you understand? Everyone's entitled to an opinion on the GDB without being personally attacked.

I could have said a variety of other things but I chose to limit myself to that. It was a very ignorant statement about a very powerful skill. Was it easy to misintepret that he was a newbie because of that? Yes, and I didn't realize it until someone said something. Hence 'You sure act like you are' in reference to being a newbie. The fact that he joined on Jan 30th doesn't exactly help make him seem like a veteran player, either.

Cogato: You have two yes's, a ridiculous no that you tried to use to reinforce your argument, a personal attack on yourself, and a throwaway vote. That's not exactly a balanced and unbiased poll, especially considering your vote options make it seem that all players follow that idea. A simple 'yes' and 'no' will suffice.

Forest Junkie: "Maybe if there was a way to balance the system, where a wrist shot can only take a max amount of hp, say only 1/8 your total hp, while a perfect head shot is a one kill."

Are you mad?! You want to give the playerbase the potential to kill another person at the cost of fifteen obsidian and two seconds of delay. That's ridiculous. How is it you people can't realize that making archery more powerful is basically going to destroy the combat code? It's basically the same effect as making weapons one hit kills in combat. Sure, it's realistic, but you just completely fucked over the coded system. I cannot possibly fathom why you, Cogato, and pretty much everybody else who voted yes want to give other players the ability to kill you in under two seconds without a chance to fight back. It's ludicrous.

[House Rising Sun]

Don't be such a hater, man.

On what forest junkie said, perhaps he meant -could- be a one hit kill. To that I disagree, but there's no reason to call him mad or get all worked up over it. A shot in the wrist should do much less for killing a person than a shot in the chest, or a shot in the mouth. Being instantly killed is just the way of the game, though.

However, the more we put our focus on location-based damage and whatnot, the less we see the simplicity of Armageddon's combat system. It tells you just what you need to know, nothing more, and doesn't require a lot of constant typing to engage an enemy. This allows us to emote and breathe some life into usually dry fights. If you get hit in the wrist and it half kills you, oh well. Pretend your pc got shot in the gut, and all is well.

So I'd support limiting damages for certain locations, but going very far beyond that will only hurt combat. I've already spoken my mind on knockdown.

OR BETTER YET!

shot -through- the wrist to the gut.

now thatd be creative.

I cannot possibly fathom why you, Cogato, and pretty much everybody else who voted yes want to give other players the ability to kill you in under two seconds without a chance to fight back.

I voted yes because of my beef with throw, not to make archery more powerful, which I know it is already.

[Carnage]

I voted yes because of my beef with throw, not to make archery more powerful, which I know it is already.

When you think about it, though, throw is pretty logical and not -that- bad. You have to get pretty good with it first, and there is some dependance on STR. Second, I think the whole getting knocked down with a dagger deal is pretty much a little niche in the code. When you use a javelin or hurl an axe at someone there's always that possibility of losing your balance. I think of it like getting hit with a medicine ball but I'm off weight-wise.

Keep in mind, as well, that there needs to be something there to seperate archery and throw. Archery can do more damage and go longer distances. What can throw do, except knock you down?

Throw's knockdown is a death sentence, as people have mentioned knockdown is. It's about as powerful as an archer. And yes, I do definitely agree that other thrown items can be that powerful, but really, a dagger flying a league (Outdoors I'm speaking in terms of) and knocking these huge animals down, is nutty.  

That's why I imagine with the new weight code, throw could be tweaked to take into account the weight of the projectile as to its knockdown power. That way these half-stone knives aren't acting like Gizhat anymore.

[Stroker]

How about emoting that you are knocked down by an arrow if for instance it is a good shot that takes off quite a bit of hp.

[Lazloth]

Archery is in serious need of attention; anyone who is championing added affects to the skill has either not played an archer or not surpassed newbie stardom.

How about emoting that you are knocked down by an arrow if for instance it is a good shot that takes off quite a bit of hp.

[Stroker]

A heavy, chitin arrow flies in from the west, striking the lean, dark-eyed man in his leather-clad chest, the sheer force of the blow sends him staggering backwards and onto his knees.

Sorry, I must be stupid or something then, I don't see a problem with doing this. Explain to me what is wrong with this idea.

[Lazloth]

Kudos to you, if you find the time to drop an emote while under fire. More than likely, before or by the time you hit [return], you are a corpse.

[Delirium]

Feel free to RP that to your heart's content, but I don't particularly think it needs to be actually coded in.

[Stroker]

That's considering that the person who is shooting at you is not bothering to emote loading his weapons and stuff like that and if they are it can be pretty fair, no? And if they're not then oh well you might die, like we haven't done that before a number of times.  And yes, I've rpied wounds in a critical situation and I've survived ..... well some of the times at least.

[Callisto]

Archery is the single most powerful (non-magickal) skill, hands down.

Three room range plus... let me state that again before I continue.

THREE ROOM RANGE.

Still, for this example we'll drop it down to the average distance of two. So, you've got two room range combined with a moderate skill level that amounts to around 30 damage per shot. I know 30 damage is in the lower-average range for the skill, though my guess is that's where your average 10 day non-twink would be. I'll note the skill has less then a seconds delay at that same skill level. For the benefit of the doubt, lets bump it up to a full two seconds.

Put simple:
2 room range
30 damage per arrow
2 second delay per arrow

Now, we can factor in your average player uses Zmud, meaning they can repeat the stacked command 'pull quiver;shoot DeleraksCurrentRanger n' with a single stroke of the enter key. Again, lets assume our player base is morbidly obese and types only with thumbs - we'll leave it an even two seconds.

Put simple again:
2 room range
30 damage per arrow
2 second delay per arrow
2 delay between key-strokes

So, we assume your average PC has 90HP and the archer misses once, since one in four shots is about the average rate for good human agility in my experience. That means your average PC will be killed in 16 seconds. Its deadly powerful, but you can still type flee self or a direction in time.

NOW, lets factor in that the second arrow knocks the target down for three seconds - two for entering flee while 'sitting' and an extra one to type stand.

I'll break it down even more:
3 seconds spent registering what's going on
3 seconds spent deciding an escape plan
3 seconds to stand up from being knocked down and type flee

That leaves you:
7 seconds leeway between you and your characters death

Keep in mind that is seven seconds if you don't role-play any aspect of the scene at all and if your attacker is a little short of halfway to being a master of the skill. It is also adding in a lot of other added advantages you probably would actually get in game, such as extended delay times and such.

All in all adding the knock down factor raises response time by a couple seconds each time it kicks in, but when all you have is sixteen to start with..

Yes, upping archery is a fine idea.  :roll:

[gfair]

(Yes I know this isnt the actual text, but by saying the arrow flying straight through you would not cause you to fall or roll on the ground or atleast drop to a knee clutching the area of infliction, not very realistic? That or everyone has the ability to perform incredible feats of mind over matter.)

Well, see, getting shot with an arrow in real life usually means the same as getting shot with a bullet - getting hit with one is relatively easy to live through at certain angles, and body locations, or it can kill you in an instant.  Getting hit with anything more than one, and the chance of living diminishes quickly.

And realistically, if you think about it COG, characters in Arm are superheroes by virtue of the Arm code.  They can get hit by multiple arrows in various locations and not die.  Any alternative to make archery more realistic would be a severe alteration of the skill, one that makes it far more powerful.  Do warriors, rangers, or the Archer subclass need any more power?  I don't think so.  There is a level of realism beyond which the boundary between fiction and reality blur, and the game would be ruined.  This is the flaw with your thought that Archery needs knockdown.

[Mufasa]

skills
------------------------
parry







Doh!

[Stroker]

Let us remember that arrows are blockable and the person using a bow is at a high disadvantage, being that when he is firing he is not using any other weapons and can be easily struck down with even a weakling weapons user. Next, I think introducing the bow knockdown skill is bad, I am not arguing for it. Further, a good fighter will be able to take down a few arrows as he makes his way across towards the bow wielder - as soon as he is within the same space - he uses bash (if he feels it is needed), then wack away and in a few hits the fight is over.  Yes it may seem as I am bias and obviously exaggerating, but so is Callisto. A very skilled power-gamer will do this - but a very good rpier will not. What are you afraid of someone dying? A very good warrior meets you in the desert wastes - he turns out to be a raider and kills you in less than a hit. What is archery and who can master it? Mostly rangers and the like. And who are rangers? Even the best of them could not handle a weak warrior.  Yes occasionally you will meet an amazing warrior archer or something along those lines, but I doubt many warriors can learn to be as good as rangers at archery. Do not introduce this new archery effect to the game. I think rping can take the place of it, as it did in many other cases. But do not make it seem that archery is the most powerfull skill in the game.  Of course, yes it is if you place an aged archer against a newbie warrior, but so is with any class. But if you place an aged warrior against an aged archer, the fight can go either direction.

[Lazloth]

I would like to add that parrying arrows is inane.  I know this underwent some modification of late, but I imagine the core of the code has been retained.

That said, Dirr, one situation perhaps you're not taking into account is a duo, trio or band of archers.  Three archers with above-average abilities will kill you in ~4 seconds, barring super Zorro-like reflexes on your part.  If you're a 30-day warrior victim, maybe bump that figure to 6 to 9 secs.  With arrow weight dropped to close to nothing, you have the real possibility of walking machine guns in the sands.

[Callisto]

You aren't going to be knocking many arrows out of the air - that's a freak thing and shouldn't be taken into account when you're talking balance issues, in my opinion.

Even with a shield you aren't going to block enough arrows to survive long, maybe you block one in four arrows, which again is about average for a human with a moderate shield use skill. We again factor in that one misses, so it bumps the leeway up to about nine seconds, as opposed to seven. That's again assuming the victim is lucky enough to score that block with their shield.

Any way you slice is, archery is already immensely powerful and does not need to add knock down effects as well.

[Stroker]

First - I am neutral on the subject of addint a knockdown effect to the archery skill.
Second - Sorry - I don't see how a good archer is any better than a good warrior. I mean I could make the same example a 30 day archer surrounded by 3 or 4 warriors. Yes you will die. You are making it seem like archery is superpowerfull by giving me an example of four versus one? One versus one is what I'm talking about .... if anyone is jumped by four raiders, archers or otherwise they are screwed.

[Anonymous]

Second - Sorry - I don't see how a good archer is any better than a good warrior. I mean I could make the same example a 30 day archer surrounded by 3 or 4 warriors. Yes you will die. You are making it seem like archery is superpowerfull by giving me an example of four versus one? One versus one is what I'm talking about .... if anyone is jumped by four raiders, archers or otherwise they are screwed.

But those raiders have to go through the hassle of being in the same room with you.

`shoot loser east` is much harder to get away from codewise than `kill loser`.

I had a great PC shot to hell by an elf that was good to the bow.  The elf would have probably eaten sand if he was in the same room with me.

Archery can also do a tremendous amount of damage if someone gets lucky.

I can't speak for Callisto but I think that her point is that archery is fine enough on its own, it doesn't need any more uberness.  From a balance standpoint this would throw things out of whack.  This is not to say that the original idea is bad, just perhaps out of balance.

Its kinda like adding a chance of insta-subdue to bash.

[Stroker]

No, I'm proposing the idea that a well-armored and shielded warrior - standing at the same level of strength and skill as an archer will be at par with each other. Of course a sudden attack by an archer could easily kill a surprised fighter, but so is a surprise attack by a warrior. Yes archery gets a bonus of shooting a person from afar and doing the SAME damage as someone with a sword or any other weapon - but the reason for this is because they cannot defend themselves in close combat.


Again, I am NOT arguing for or against the implementation of the knockdown effect to archery.

[Callisto]

The difference between a ranged attack and a melee attack is, is that a melee attack is easily escaped from, surprise attack or not. This is a simple and accepted fact; melee combat is easily escaped from unless you're in a locked room. This is why templars drag you to prison before ordering a half dozen NPC soldiers to kill you - even when attacked by three or four melee fighters, fleeing is still an effective option.

When you're being torn apart from arrows and attempt to flee, the person just needs to keep within eye sight to keep punching arrows into you, no matter how armored you are.

The main reason for the archers sheer advantage? Consistency. When a warrior engages in a melee, there is no sense of consistency. Attacks are parried and dodged and the battle can take a while to lead to a kill. The damage can be 30 damage each and every successful strike, but on average warriors get a lot of nicks and grazes with the odd hard hit thrown in, unless the victim is unarmed or vastly inferior.

An archers arrow will strike and do a consistent amount of damage based on sheer skill level and the hit location. It might waver three to five points, but the damage is consistent each and every successful strike. Each strike can be delivered within two or three seconds, where as melee requires you to make much more difficult and complex rolls then ranged.

Don't misunderstand Dirr; every skill is powerful in the right situation, the general point is that when it comes to advantage and sheer killing power, nothing compares to a high archery skill.

[Hot_Dancer]

I don't think archery should have a knockdown affect. A skilled archer can take out numerous people before melee range is gained if they're not properly prepared (have shields).

A complete newbie with a shield can expect to have half to 3/4ths of the arrows hit his/her shield. A skilled warrior can expect this as well with the added benefit of also being able to attempt parrying the arrow out of the air.

A 30 day warrior will always beat a 30 day ranger if he's intelligent enough to use a shield barring special circumstances.

Hot_Dancer