I have an archer as a character and she royally kicks ass. I chose her over the ranger since it looked better to me. I also thought that long bows gotta be the best and so far I've been really happy with my decisions. But what is this I hear about short bows being better than long bows? Also, I heard from this forum that archers and rangers suck. My two archers (equipped with strong arm +2 and elven bow +3 and whatever magical arrows I can find) kick royal ass! They dish out more damage than my two fighters (with twin katana's), they seem to have a higher chance to hit, and if some damn annoying mage starts to cast something like horror, my archer has the range to kill him/her before he/she gets the chance. I really wanna know, what's so bad about archers?

Nothing they kick ass. theres just a shortage of good long bows, and the best bow in the game is a short bow.

Hi, my character is a pure Kensai Grand Master 2HS, maxed out in single weopons proficiency. He currently wields the Vorpal Blade which has a 15% chance per hit that the target must make a saving throw versus death at a -4 penalty. If they fail the save, instant death. I killed Firkraag in two hits with it, have to admit I got lucky on that one He gets additional attack bonuses and normally dishes out 35 to 60 points damage with each hit, if the Vorpal doesn't do the instant kill, he's a lot of fun.

But I do agree tha Archers rock. Minsc is my longbowman with The Heartseeker and Elven Court Bow, for long range. Then he switches to mastery at dual wielding maces.
Yoshi is my primary Archer with the Taigun short bow, and backstabs when possible with the Short Sword of Backstabbing +4.

In my opinion Archers are an integral part of the team.

Odd. How'd you manage to keep Yoshimo past chapter four?