Jump to content

Crossbows


Demivrgvs

Recommended Posts

Although a longbow achieves comparable accuracy and faster shooting rate than an average crossbow, crossbows release more kinetic energy and can be used effectively after a week of training, while a comparable single-shot skill with a longbow takes years of strength training to overcome the draw strength of the longbow, as well as years of practice needed to use it with skill.

From wikipedia.

 

Demi, do you also think about some changes for usability of weapons? 3rd editional weapons groups (Simple, Martial, Exotic), all classes being capable of using any weapons. Damn. In such a deal for example, Crossbow as simple weapon would be usable by everyone and everyone would have proficiency in it (1*), but noone would have more than mastery because compared to them bows are "weapons for masters". ^^

Link to comment

Xbow vs bow

Wow, I've tried to think a little more on it (though without sleep it was indeed hard ;) ) and I think yarpen was indeed right about raising xbow's dmg output. With the suggested solution I think we actually achieve something I didn't thought was possible: making xbows the best choice for unskilled characters, and bows the best choice for skilled ones.

 

I'll try to give an example. Let's compare a light xbow with a short bow, during 2 rounds, and assuming you always hit (that is conservative for the xbow, because it has better accuracy):

* the xbow hits two times, dealing 1d10 dmg, thus 11 points of dmg on average

* the bow hits three times, dealing 1d6 dmg, thus 10.5 points of dmg on average

The xbow is slightly more damaging (not much I know) but it also has a +1 to thac0, which for unskilled characters who can't specialize on weapons (e.g. thieves) is actually a very good bonus (especially early on).

 

Then let's re-do the same thing for a character specialized in both weapons, you'd have:

* the xbow hits two times, dealing 1d10+2 dmg, thus 15 points of dmg on average

* the bow hits three times, dealing 1d6+2 dmg, thus 16.5 points of dmg on average

The bow is clearly the best choice now, and trained warriors probably don't care about xbow's +1 thac0 because they already have a pretty good base thac0 on their own.

 

@Ardanis, the above example also shows once again how much overpowerd a full +1 apr was for bows. Doesn't it?

 

@yarpen, I was writing this before your post, but I think I kinda answered to you, haven't I? And yes, I believe that making xbow usable by almost anyone would be a good tweak, though I'm not sure if it belongs to IR or KR.

 

 

Lowering any weapons natural APR to less than 1 sounds absurd to me.
I thought they were alright the way you had them. Dropping APR would be a mistake imo, since everything is based on the idea of the one minute round (compressed in BG).
As I thought I'm not the only one who would find that difficult to accept.

 

After a certain point it seems strange to add to the damage of a bolt, does a bolt really do the damage of a slice of a bastard sword? I would think its properties would be better represented by better THACO (as is already the case).
Well, I can assure you a crossbow's bolt can have devastating effects indeed, and against armored targets crossbows are much more damaging than swords (though that may also partially be represented with a thac0 bonus as I did). Furthermore, bastard swords would still deal more dmg in the hands of a good fighter because of STR bonuses, KR's Offensive Stance, etc.
Link to comment
@yarpen, I was writing this before your post, but I think I kinda answered to you, haven't I? And yes, I believe that making xbow usable by almost anyone would be a good tweak, though I'm not sure if it belongs to IR or KR.

Yup, thanks for that. And yeah, optional component for KR which loosens up weapons usability (clerics with any weapons, mages with all "simple" weapons) would be great. But please, consider IR also a part of this work as you can modify weapons Strenght requirements now. It's for example a good way to nerf blunt weapons (which should need far more strenght than piercing/slashing ones) and exotic weapons (dexterity requirement of 13 or maybe even 15 for Katanas and Wakizashis would be just fine).

 

Increasing Hammers, Maces, Flails/Morningstars strenght requirement would be also quite important for Clerics. Viconia and Aerie would be more 'mageling' type when it's about fighting because they wouldn't be able to use most devastating weapons without any strenght buffs. Which IMO suits them well.

Link to comment
Increasing Hammers, Maces, Flails/Morningstars strenght requirement would be also quite important for Clerics. Viconia and Aerie would be more 'mageling' type when it's about fighting because they wouldn't be able to use most devastating weapons without any strenght buffs. Which IMO suits them well.
If I'm not wrong Aerie already cannot use hammers (STR req is 10) nor maces (again 10), and they both cannot use morningstars (STR req is 11) nor flails (13).

 

 

Xbow speed factor

What did we decided regarding xbow speed factor? I think we decided it should be better than bow's one, and vanilla's light xbow already is slightly faster (5 vs short bow's 6), but should heavy xbow (its vanilla's speed factor is 10) have pretty much the same speed factor or at least being faster than bows?

Link to comment

I think that values of 8 for Heavy Crossbow and 5 for Light Crossbow would be fine. Light Crossbow should be a bit slower than Short Bow (4), a bit faster than Longbow (6-7) and much faster than Composite Longbow (9). Also don't you think that slings should have large attack speed factor? You know, spinning this stone lasts a bit.

Link to comment
@Ardanis, the above example also shows once again how much overpowerd a full +1 apr was for bows. Doesn't it?
No. As you've said yourself, let's agree to differ ;)

 

When I'll play the next time, I'll try 2d6 damage and +2 thaco for xbows and +1 ApR for bows. I'm quite assured they'll be equal.

 

Xbow speed factor

Yes for the same value for light/heavy. Somewhere within 2-5 range, I imagine. Likely 3, or 4.

 

(dexterity requirement of 13 or maybe even 15 for Katanas and Wakizashis would be just fine).
Yes, please.
Link to comment

So maybe to make difference between Light and Heavy Crossbows:

- enchantment (1-handed for Light, 2-Handed for Heavy)

- range (+5 for Heavy ones)

- +1 ThaC0 bonus (+1 for Light, +2 for Heavy)

- +2 damage bonus (and then bolts can deal 1d8/2d4 of damage)

 

Then we can agree on same Attack speed factor, or difference of one-two points.

 

Why there should be such a hard distinction? Heavy Crossbows are martial weapon usable only by warriors (I am the only one who thinks that those should be restricted from Bards?) so they deserve to be killing machines in opposition of Light Crossbows which are "weapons for peasants and traders".

Link to comment

I forgot to mention the main argument for lowering xbows' ApR, and it comes from PnP no less.

RAPID RELOAD [GENERAL]

Choose a type of crossbow (hand, light, or heavy).

Prerequisite: Weapon Proficiency (crossbow type chosen).

Benefit: The time required for you to reload your chosen type of crossbow is reduced to a free action (for a hand or light crossbow) or a move action (for a heavy crossbow). Reloading a crossbow still provokes an attack of opportunity.

If you have selected this feat for hand crossbow or light crossbow, you may fire that weapon as many times in a full attack action as you could attack if you were using a bow.

Normal: A character without this feat needs a move action to reload a hand or light crossbow, or a full-round action to reload a heavy crossbow.

Special: You can gain Rapid Reload multiple times. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of crossbow.

A fighter may select Rapid Reload as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Link to comment

i've "fought" with both and bow vs xbow is about as clear an example of the speed/power dichotomy if there ever was one. historically, in as simplistic a description as possible, bows were used to mow down hordes of light infantry while xbows were used to one-shot armored targets. finding the stats to describe each situation is easier with that understanding.

 

now that bows' APR has been reduced, a xbow is already much more viable. keep it simple and do something like

 

light xbow: speed 5, dmg 1d8, thaco +1, STR 6

heavy xbow: speed 10, dmg 1d10, thaco +1, crit +1, STR 12

 

i might even give a -1 AC penalty to the hxb, otherwise it's too obviously superior since there are no class-based restrictions as with short & long bows.

 

also, xbows weren't all hand-cocked. most, especially "heavy" ones, utilized levers or cranks.

 

// getting closer to having to merge IR & KR with any proposed proficiency changes. maybe keep the individual mods more independent and less radical and work on a separate mod that unites them.

Link to comment
Also don't you think that slings should have large attack speed factor? You know, spinning this stone lasts a bit.
I obviously agree, slings should have the worst speed factor indeed.

 

 

@Ardanis, the above example also shows once again how much overpowerd a full +1 apr was for bows. Doesn't it?
No. As you've said yourself, let's agree to differ ;)

 

When I'll play the next time, I'll try 2d6 damage and +2 thaco for xbows and +1 ApR for bows. I'm quite assured they'll be equal.

Yeah, they'll be equally overpowered for BG1! :) Are you serious? You want xbows to have greatsword's damage (the most damaging weapon in D&D) and +2 thac0 on top of it? :laugh:

 

The +2 thac0 alone that some of you are suggesting can be extremely unbalanced within BG1 imo, especially if coupled with a dmg output that more often than not would kill most low level characters in one hit. I know where it comes from, but I think +1 should be enough, no? ;)

 

The "Heavy Crossbows are martial weapon usable only by warriors" is quite untrue (if we want to stay close to real life). As long as he has enough strength to wield it any untrained peasant can use heavy xbows just as well as light ones. Actually there should be a very minimal difference between light and heavy imo (+2 dmg, and slightly worse speed perhaps) because the only other difference in real life would be the range but is not implementable (within BG you're limited to the silly 30 feet range even for the composit longbow).

 

Note that the light xbow is not the 'hand crossbow', it's just a slightly smaller and lighter xbow.

 

I forgot to mention the main argument for lowering xbows' ApR, and it comes from PnP no less.
As I told you, conceptually I completely agree. But when it comes to implement it, we can't really make it as per PnP, because there it's a cap to apr (no more than 1 attack per round), not a penalty.

 

 

now that bows' APR has been reduced, a xbow is already much more viable. keep it simple and do something like...
That's what I was trying to do, "keeping it simple" but still as close as possible to their real life counterpart.

 

i might even give a -1 AC penalty to the hxb, otherwise it's too obviously superior since there are no class-based restrictions as with short & long bows.
Well, the point instead was exactly to make xbows superior when used by unskilled characters, as described in my previous post.

 

also, xbows weren't all hand-cocked. most, especially "heavy" ones, utilized levers or cranks.
I know, as I said in an earlier post.

 

 

// getting closer to having to merge IR & KR with any proposed proficiency changes. maybe keep the individual mods more independent and less radical and work on a separate mod that unites them.
I always try to keep them as "stand alone" as possible.
Link to comment
I'd like to point out that unless we go with Yarpen's max 1 in xbow prof idea, the 1/2 apr difference will be ensure a hasted 13th fighter with 5 in xbow will totally pwn a hasted 13th fighter with 5 in bow.
That's not true, and I'm glad I managed to demostrate it to you (in private). Now I'll try to do the same for everyone who may be interested.

 

We have to see if the xbow superior damage is so high to outbeat the +1/2 apr, a difference which grows thinner the higher the base apr is (e.g. using haste), but becomes thinner the more each attack has additional sources of damage (like grandmastery's +5, various buffs like Bless, or even items like Brachers of Archery).

 

Thus, let's take a 13th lvl fighter with grandmastery on both weapons (thus base apr is 3). During 2 rounds (for simplicity) the xbow could hit 6 times, the bow could hit 7 times. For each hit the xbow deals +2 dmg (1d10 vs 1d6) compared to a bow of equivalent enchantment, and we can assume a 13th lvl character probably has at least a +2 specimen and +2 ammo, though we all know that later on you have +4/+5 specimens and +3 unlimited ammo (note: if enchantments are higher the bow is advantaged).

 

The xbow with 6 hits accumulate a +12 dmg advantage. Are 12 points of damage better than the additional full attack of the bow?

 

The bow with a hit inflicts 1d6 dmg +2 (enchantment) +2 (ammo) +5 (grandmastery) + (bow's on hit effects*) + (various buffs**).

Leaving aside for a moment * and **, we can easily see that the bow's dmg (11.5) already match xbow's one.

 

** we could say that it's more or less comparable to what Haste could do for xbows, but bows have A LOT more potential. Xbow from haste would get another +2 dmg advantage, but Bless, Aid, Chant, and Bracers of Archery would grant the bow up to +4 (not to mention V3's Potion of Heroism and Oil of Fiery Burning can give bows another +2 and +2.5 respectively).

 

* instead is clearly a HUGE bow advantage. Especially if we consider powerful on-hit effects like Eagle's Entangling effect or Ripper's Sundering effects imo, but it may be easier for some to notice it with Strong Arm's +7 dmg, Gesen or Darkfire high elemental damage, elemental/piercing damage from magical arrows, and whatever that additional attack may cause on hit.

 

 

Long story short, bows are slighty better than xbows for trained warriors even if you don't maximize their efficiency, and their potential is immensely higher than xbows. If we give bows a full +1 apr instead of +1/2 then the difference between the two weapons would be really too much in favor of bow imo (twice as much the one described above).

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...