D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
Hey, does anyone know if there are published rules for catapults, ballistae, big honkin' crossbows, and the like?
Thanks!
__________________ - Piratecat, EN World Admin
Currently editing the 4e War of the Burning Sky adventure path. Support EN Publishing, get excellent modules!
I used Heroes of Battle rules and changed the damage per DMG pg 42. It worked out pretty good.
It be nice to see/do a full conversion tho.
__________________
"Words take on strange and wonderful powers when they are written down.
Context and intonation disappear, and the words sit in a void to be construed according to the mood, intelligence and socio-political leanings of the reader."
--- Siri Agrell
In P1 (King of the Trollhaunt Warrens), in encounter R2, there's a description of a +2 Light Ballista:
- It can be operated by a team of two; both must be adjacent and can contribute actions.
- You must first load it as a standard action and then aim it (at a square) as a minor action.
- You can skip the aiming if you want to continue hitting the same square.
- Firing it requires a standard action; it has range 20/40; +13 vs. AC; 4d6+2 damage.
- There's several ways to improve the attack bonus; the damage is fixed.
Sounds like something ideal for DM hand-wavium, personally. What're you trying to do with one?
If you're trying to breach a wall, DM hand-wavium for the dramatic moment.
If you're trying to take down a dragon, DM hand-wavium for the DC to aim it, standard action to fire it, standard action to load it, and DM hand-wavium for how many bolts/rocks/cows have to hit to kill it.
If you're trying to lug it through a dungeon to use in standard fights, rocks fall, everyone dies. They're not for standard fights.
Sounds like something ideal for DM hand-wavium, personally. What're you trying to do with one?
'Hand wavium' doesn't work very well when you are using them to shoot PCs.
Or for that matter...
Quote:
If you're trying to take down a dragon, DM hand-wavium for the DC to aim it, standard action to fire it, standard action to load it, and DM hand-wavium for how many bolts/rocks/cows have to hit to kill it.
... if you are fighting a dragon. Players will never again take a dragon fight seriously if you hand wave its death.
---
It's not clear what Piratecat wants to do with these 'siege engine' but most of what has been named can be used for anti-personnel purposes so it can be an interesting thing to add to a battlefield.
Catapult; They can be used to lob all manners of antipersonnel stuff, especially in D&D where you can add alchemical compound to the mix. But you can't realistically target a PC with a catapult. You just throw it in a mass of enemies and hope something good happen.
In my game, I used off map catapults to randomly blast a part of the battlefield each round. Even enemies could be caught in these shrapnel blast, alchemical fire etc. (Which is a typical trope to highlight the ruthless nature of the overlords who don't care about the fodder). Added quite a bit of chaos to the battle. I numberered several 3x3 zones and would randomly blast one of these area. You get to scream 'incoming!' when you roll which is fun.
'Big Honking crossbows' are called Arbalests. They could generate as much as 1200 pound of pressure and could only be spanned through mechanical assistance. These were basically the sniper rifles of the middle age. In direct fire, they had much more range than a longbow and a hell of a lot more punch, which is saying something.
Something like, superior weapon, +3, 40/80, 2d12, high crit would be about right but then you hit the weapon in the gonads by requiring a standard action to load, thus halving the fire rate compared to a normal ranged weapon.
A special rule should prevent it from being kept loaded at all time just in case of an encounter.
Not very useful as a PC weapon, but can result in interesting fights where a damned sniper type opponent is shooting at you from 70 square away while you slug it out with the main force. Wee.
The Roman Ballistae
This is something that certainly could be wielded fairly directly against the PCs to throw all manners of projectiles. For example, just use alchemical fire from AV but boost the range, make it Area 1 instead but use a quick dirty rule to see if it landed in the intended square or if it missed by a few squares (Like; 1d6-2 square in direction 1d8)
You can also use it as a really 'Big honking crossbow' and just fire the traditional bolt; apparently there are accounts of specific human targets having been picked out by this kind of weapon. I'm not an historian, I haven't read the historical account, but assuming it's true, I find that highly impressive, I gotta say! Sniping out a cavalry commander just before a charge with that thing screams; 'Give that soldier a medal RIGHT NOW!' to me.
Last edited by Mal Malenkirk; 2nd January 2009 at 08:49 AM..
Siege weapons, in terms of the player's interaction with them are devices, mechanical or otherwise, that can act as impediments to the further progress of an adversary.
They would not get treated as items in 4e, nor as vehicles.
The question then to ask is: For this encounter, is the siege engine there as backdrop, or as a direct threat to the creatures themselves.?
If it's a backdrop, then it's considered terrain at most. For example, a siege tower doesn't need complicated rules for 'It's a way to get from here to here.' You can assign it defenses and hps if you feel it is appropriate. Otherwise, it gets the same treatment as an overcomplicated ladder.
If it's a direct threat/impediment to the creatures themselves, then simply stat it up exactly as you would any other trap. It has a trigger, attacks, consequences of hitting, which it would apply to unfortunate creatures in its path.
If it's neither of those things, it's just a plot device, and there has never been a need for rules for plot devices.
Siege weapons, in terms of the player's interaction with them are devices, mechanical or otherwise, that can act as impediments to the further progress of an adversary.
I would humbly disagree with this assessment. I think many players would enjoy a chance to use siege weapons upon their enemies, particularly in a scenario where they'd had them used on them previously. If the players are storming a castle and have to fight their way past the siege weapons, I think they'd derive a great deal of glee in then turning them back on their foes when they in-turn need to defend the castle from some worse threat.
I'm writing something for Dungeon Magazine, so I need something official if it exists. The information in P1 sounds perfect! Thanks very much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jhaelen
In P1 (King of the Trollhaunt Warrens), in encounter R2, there's a description of a +2 Light Ballista:
- It can be operated by a team of two; both must be adjacent and can contribute actions.
- You must first load it as a standard action and then aim it (at a square) as a minor action.
- You can skip the aiming if you want to continue hitting the same square.
- Firing it requires a standard action; it has range 20/40; +13 vs. AC; 4d6+2 damage.
- There's several ways to improve the attack bonus; the damage is fixed.
__________________ - Piratecat, EN World Admin
Currently editing the 4e War of the Burning Sky adventure path. Support EN Publishing, get excellent modules!
I think many players would enjoy a chance to use siege weapons upon their enemies.
Damn straight. I keep thinking of The Gamers... "I backstab him with the ballistae!"
__________________ - Piratecat, EN World Admin
Currently editing the 4e War of the Burning Sky adventure path. Support EN Publishing, get excellent modules!
I would humbly disagree with this assessment. I think many players would enjoy a chance to use siege weapons upon their enemies, particularly in a scenario where they'd had them used on them previously. If the players are storming a castle and have to fight their way past the siege weapons, I think they'd derive a great deal of glee in then turning them back on their foes when they in-turn need to defend the castle from some worse threat.
I don't know the best way to explain this, but I already accounted for that by the fact that traps and hazards are not restricted to enemies in 4th edition. In fact, if players have the means to use traps and hazards, they are -encouraged- to use them for their own purposes.
Siege engines are no exception to this.
There's a reason I used generic terms like 'an adversary' and 'creatures' as opposed to 'players' or 'monsters.'
I don't know the best way to explain this, but I already accounted for that by the fact that traps and hazards are not restricted to enemies in 4th edition. In fact, if players have the means to use traps and hazards, they are -encouraged- to use them for their own purposes.
Siege engines are no exception to this.
There's a reason I used generic terms like 'an adversary' and 'creatures' as opposed to 'players' or 'monsters.'
My misunderstanding then - when I saw "adversary" in your example, I immediately thought "Monsters are the players adversaries."
Well the idea is if you're in a battle, and -they- have ballistae and stuff, and it has an effect on the players, using trap/hazard rules allows you to give the party the XP to reflect the very real threat value of these items.
It also creates a very nicely streamlined mechanic for if/when the players get access to said weapons and want to turn them back on the enemy. What would the write up for a ballistae or catapult look like as a trap though? Would the trigger be something like "operator spends a standard action" or something to this effect?
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
