Someone at my GW said that rangers have str 3 bows. Is this correct? or do they have the normal str 2 bows

thanks

_________________
"I will take it. I will take the Ring to Mordor...though I do not know the way."
—Frodo, at the Council of Elrond

I checked my rulebooks, and rangers have str. 2 bows, just like normal human bows.

thanks that´s what i thought but the guy i talked with was totally sure that he was right

_________________
"I will take it. I will take the Ring to Mordor...though I do not know the way."
—Frodo, at the Council of Elrond

Let him look at the rulebook, that shouldn't be so hard

will next time i meet him didn´t have my rulebook at hand when he said it

_________________
"I will take it. I will take the Ring to Mordor...though I do not know the way."
—Frodo, at the Council of Elrond

Aren't there some rangers that have longbows?

EDIT: nevermind, I'm thinking of the old WD profile for "Hunters of Anfalas".

_________________
Well, that's my 2 cents.

Dwarf rangers have longbows, if I'm correct.

The terminology is conflicting:

Orc bow: short range, S2
Human bow: long range, S2
Dwarf bow: range like an Orc bow, S3
Dwarf longbow: same as human bow in range and power
Elf bow: long range, S3
Human longbow: same as elf bow in range and power

Anybody ever spend points for their Dwarf Rangers to have a "longbow". Doesn't seem worth the points to get less power.

I do. I like having the extra range and better shoot value; it's good for picking off banners or models holding objectives.

_________________
"There are few left in Middle Earth like Aragorn, son of Arathorn." - Gandalf, Many Meetings

Sure do, having a longer range and a greater chance of hitting will alway's play a roll on the battlefield, where as a higher strength will not. Evil have a ton of popular D4 and D6 models, in these cases S3 has no additional effect over S2.

And power isn't always neccesary.

But there bow costs 3pts.

So, the total cost of the model is still ok, or would you rather pay a higher basic cost which would make non-missile armed rangers more expensive for no benefit of a 3+ skill?

I didnt say i didnt like using them.. i find dwarf rangers good and i actually prefer them over dwarf warriors with bows, but 3 pts is a bit strange when men can get the same for 2 pts less...

i was just stating the obvious when i said there 3pts lol..

Actually, the cost of dwarf ranger bows doesn't really make a great deal of sense to me. After all, they seem to be the only models who pay for their improved shooting skill. For one point more you can field high elves with elf bows - which means more bow strength, fighting skill, courage, and movement.

The dwarves also pay 3 points for throwing axes, the rohan men only pay 2 points, what's up with that?

_________________
My LotR and 40k blog, Realm of Battle board, dwarves, gobs, space wolves and battle reports. http://simbattleboard.blogspot.com/

Dwarves hit on 3+. This is more important than you would think, as my friend play Rohan and almost never hits anything with his spears.

_________________
"Woe to the Vanquished!"
-Brennus-

Thats because the theoretical cost of an elf is to cheap.