Am I doing Precise Shot right?

During my playtesting, the pre-gen human fighter seems overpowered.  With Rapid Shot, he can use his MDD to attack two different monsters.  Here is the way I am doing it:
 

Attack 1:  Longbow (range 150/600) +5; 1d8 + 4 piercing damage
Attack 2:  Longbow (range 150/600) +5; 1d8 + 4 piercing damage 
10-24 damage

Every round he is not in melee, he is doing 2d8+8 damage.  This kind of puts the wizard and the dwarf fighter way behind in damage dealing.  That is a minimum of 10 damage if he hits, compared to the 1-10 damage a wizard would hit with Ray of Frost or the Rogue's attack of:

Short Sword +2; 1d8 + 3 piercing damage
Short Sword +2; 1d8 piercing damage
5-19 damage (but crappy to hit)


Battleaxe +4; 1d10 + 3 slashing damage, + 1d6 (MDD)
5-19 damage

Is this the way it is supposed to be?

Edit: D'oh. I meant Rapid Shot

well if you are talking about precise shot, then yes, you are reading it very wrong.

but if you in fact mean rapid shot, then that is another matter.
the intention of rapid shot is that you forgo one of your dice and make 2 seperate attack rolls against two seperate targets. it may not be the same target and you must declare rapid shot as your action. so spend the die before making the first attack
Yeah.  I was talking about rapid shot & edited the post to show that.


Ranged Fighters do have kind of a damage advantage over melee now that Dex can apply to damage. I'm up in the air about whether this is a bad thing. Arrows are truly devastating to the body, after all, moving much faster and piercing much deeper than your average sword blow, and there is a case to be made for the Dex mod to damage, because being able to aim for vital spots would allow an archer with high Dex to cause more damage than one who can't aim.

In turn, when using a ranged weapon a Fighter can't use Parry. But attacking with a ranged weapon at melee range is no problem anymore. I think using a ranged weapon should provoke an attack of opportunity to balance the options better. Another possibility would be making the Fighter's armor proficiency depend on their combat style, so the Sharpshooter couldn't wear heavy armor, trading defense for damage.

Another way would be to decrease the bows' damage, or increase melee damage, but I don't think that's a good option. They could also restrict martial damage die for extra damage to melee attacks. Both of these I think are artificial limitations, though, and any balancing mechanic should have a logical reason for it.
Remember for rapid shot they have to be within 10 feet of each other, and remember that they could have cover
Arrows are truly devastating to the body, after all, moving much faster and piercing much deeper than your average sword blow ...



As opposed to, say, a pale beam of blue-white energy that chills your enemy to the bone?  Wizards are just looking really weak here.  My campaigns are doing twice the number of encounters per day that we did with 4e, and that really is cutting into the effectiveness of my mages.  (On writing that out, a simple solution might just be to send them to town more often).


But attacking with a ranged weapon at melee range is no problem anymore.



Thank you.  I totally missed this.  I took it for granted that the rules had not changed here.  This will change things in my game.  I almost had a TPK because my level 3 fighter (dex ranger) was surrounded by rats and couldn't kill them fast enough.