Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 22

Author Topic: Golem Smith  (Read 25238 times)

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #75 on: January 20, 2013, 06:35:31 pm »

Yes they do, because they have more chances to do so.

gman8181

  • Bay Watcher
  • Mr. Peanut - The Peanut Man
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #76 on: January 20, 2013, 06:35:31 pm »

More shots does mean more chances to pierce the armor or get into a weak spot, but I still think we should stick with ranged weapons.
Logged
Quote from: GUNINANRUNIN
Sure thing peanut man!

GreatWyrmGold

  • Bay Watcher
  • Sane, by the local standards.
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #77 on: January 20, 2013, 06:38:18 pm »

Yes they do, because they have more chances to do so.
No, it just means that a weapon will penetrate more times. If an arrow can never penetrate armor, putting 9,000 more arrows in the sky won't help any.
Logged
Sig
Are you a GM with players who haven't posted? TheDelinquent Players Help will have Bay12 give you an action!
[GreatWyrmGold] gets a little crown. May it forever be his mark of Cain; let no one argue pointless subjects with him lest they receive the same.

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #78 on: January 20, 2013, 06:50:15 pm »

Yes they do, because they have more chances to do so.
No, it just means that a weapon will penetrate more times. If an arrow can never penetrate armor, putting 9,000 more arrows in the sky won't help any.
But if an arrow can penetrate armor, the argument stands, and if they can't, why would we make them our primary weapon?

gman8181

  • Bay Watcher
  • Mr. Peanut - The Peanut Man
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #79 on: January 20, 2013, 06:50:38 pm »

Not every arrow is shot with the same amount of force nor is every arrow aimed well enough to make contact with the enemy.  Sort of irrelevant though considering we both agree that the bow and arrow is the best choice.
Logged
Quote from: GUNINANRUNIN
Sure thing peanut man!

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #80 on: January 20, 2013, 06:52:04 pm »

I guess, but we should try to get something more powerful than a bow in the ranged weapon field. Just saying.

GreatWyrmGold

  • Bay Watcher
  • Sane, by the local standards.
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #81 on: January 20, 2013, 06:53:06 pm »

Yes they do, because they have more chances to do so.
No, it just means that a weapon will penetrate more times. If an arrow can never penetrate armor, putting 9,000 more arrows in the sky won't help any.
But if an arrow can penetrate armor, the argument stands, and if they can't, why would we make them our primary weapon?
1. They can.
2. Because we don't need to get up-close-and-personal with enemies to use it? Seriously, we're not a mighty adventurer, we're a golemsmith's apprentice. We should act with more caution.

I guess, but we should try to get something more powerful than a bow in the ranged weapon field. Just saying.
What, a throwing sword?
Logged
Sig
Are you a GM with players who haven't posted? TheDelinquent Players Help will have Bay12 give you an action!
[GreatWyrmGold] gets a little crown. May it forever be his mark of Cain; let no one argue pointless subjects with him lest they receive the same.

gman8181

  • Bay Watcher
  • Mr. Peanut - The Peanut Man
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #82 on: January 20, 2013, 06:53:40 pm »

Long term yes, maybe magic of some sort or guns if they exist but for now the bow is the best option we have imo.
Logged
Quote from: GUNINANRUNIN
Sure thing peanut man!

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #83 on: January 20, 2013, 06:54:20 pm »

I was thinking maybe some sort of handheld artillery piece. Again, like the javelin thrower.

Gotdamnmiracle

  • Bay Watcher
  • Or I'll cut ya to dust.
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #84 on: January 20, 2013, 06:58:51 pm »

I was thinking maybe some sort of handheld artillery piece. Again, like the javelin thrower.

I purse my lips to this.
Logged
Go back see if he's there and run him over, and drink his gun!

Wwolin

  • Bay Watcher
  • [EXTRA_BUTCHER_OBJECT]
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #85 on: January 20, 2013, 06:59:00 pm »

I guess, but we should try to get something more powerful than a bow in the ranged weapon field. Just saying.
You don't actually get much more powerful than the bow in the ranged weapon field. Your run of the mill English longbow took just over one-hundred pounds of force to draw, and even when the shots failed to pierce armor, they would still break bones from the force of impact. Now, combine this with the fact that a skilled bowman could fire off a shot every three to five seconds, and you have the weapon that's one of the main reasons why armored knights became obsolete in battle.
Logged
I meant we'd start stabbing the walls and floor for points and not just for science.

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #86 on: January 20, 2013, 07:01:48 pm »

Again, it's a wimpy hunting bow and we are no amazing archer. Something more like a crossbow would be better I say.

GreatWyrmGold

  • Bay Watcher
  • Sane, by the local standards.
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #87 on: January 20, 2013, 07:05:09 pm »

I guess, but we should try to get something more powerful than a bow in the ranged weapon field. Just saying.
You don't actually get much more powerful than the bow in the ranged weapon field. Your run of the mill English longbow took just over one-hundred pounds of force to draw, and even when the shots failed to pierce armor, they would still break bones from the force of impact. Now, combine this with the fact that a skilled bowman could fire off a shot every three to five seconds, and you have the weapon that's one of the main reasons why armored knights became obsolete in battle.
Fight, fight, fight, fight the urge to say I told you so!

Again, it's a wimpy hunting bow and we are no amazing archer. Something more like a crossbow would be better I say.
1. Did it say what kind?
2. We don't have access to crossbows. It's bow, sword, other sword. BOW.
Logged
Sig
Are you a GM with players who haven't posted? TheDelinquent Players Help will have Bay12 give you an action!
[GreatWyrmGold] gets a little crown. May it forever be his mark of Cain; let no one argue pointless subjects with him lest they receive the same.

gman8181

  • Bay Watcher
  • Mr. Peanut - The Peanut Man
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #88 on: January 20, 2013, 07:05:37 pm »

We aren't any more skilled with any of the other weapons offered.  At least with the bow we can stay at a safer distance.  Yes I think we all agree that we should upgrade at some point but currently crossbows, and all those other better weapons are not current options.
Logged
Quote from: GUNINANRUNIN
Sure thing peanut man!

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Golem Smith
« Reply #89 on: January 20, 2013, 07:06:19 pm »

Not saying now. Later we can get different weapons. Also, why would we be given a high quality bow as our starting weapon?
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 22