Thank you for your input Supremacy. I've fixed the errata now and will upload a new version soon.
Here are my thoughts about the other items you pointed out; tell me if they make sense.
Supremacy wrote:
1° D6+5 HP again, I'm bored of that many Characters with the same amount of HP. D6+6 would have been better, at least for a change.
This could work. What does everybody else think?
Supremacy wrote:
2° Again, 6 in Defense; I would had like for an Attacking Archer at range but a defending Char at close combat, since it's a mobile/agile fighter, i.e. 7 Defense. Since there is only 1 Char: the Knight, that as that much DEF, it would make for a good change. At worst, reduce his Attack to 11, but I don't think it's a good idea.
I don't see it this way I'm afraid. I'm not aware of any historical evidence for archers to be particularly good in defence. If anything, I could see an argument being made the other way.
Supremacy wrote:
3° Since it's not a close combat fighter, what would be the good reason to ask for 9 Strenght ? I believe 9 Intelligence sounds better for a range combat Char. And probably ask for 11 or 12 Reflexes would be better, according to the multiple skills that he got.
A lot of strength is needed to pull a bow. I suppose this restriction could be lifted for crossbowmen and perhaps slingers though.
Supremacy wrote:
4° In Rapid Shooting, the distance between the 3 targets shouldn't be relevant, since you DIVIDE the Attack in 3, you should be able to shoot at them in a 180° in front of you, up to the weapon range. Close targets are mandatory only if you keep full Attack.
180 degrees is a very wide arc (much wider than the human field of binocular view, in fact), and my feeling was that it's really only practical to shoot at multiple targets within a narrower field - I had about 45 degrees in mind, based on a few basic experiments I did standing in a field. Because it takes time and energy to switch from one target to another, it seems to me that if you're shooting at a wider arc than about 45 degrees you'll end up wasting too much time just rotating and not aiming or shooting.
Supremacy wrote:
5° To me the Archer is a fast-moving/fighting Char, so a basic AF of 2 sounds better. At best, do like the Hunter class and add a 'Soldier' skill, to reach no more than AF 3: Ringmail/Hauberk. That will mostly differentiate the Archer from the Hunter class, which is a very good thing.
I'm a bit torn on this one. I selected the penalty we see because historically archers quite commonly wore armour, and it didn't seem to impact their archery. Your suggestion is a good one I think; it would perhaps offset the overpoweredness of the Archer that Dreadnought and Kharille have commented on.
Thanks again!
Cheers,
-Kyle