Alternatives to bows

[argo]

That's wrong. It's a full round action to throw a two-handed weapon.

Yes, but a shortspear (what used to be called a halfspear in 3.0) is a one handed weapon so it is a standard attack to throw. A longspear is a two handed reach weapon and takes a full round to throw (along with a -4 penalty for not being a throwing weapon). Meanwhile a regular spear (what used to be called a shortspear in 3.0) is a two handed throwing weapon without reach.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Yes, but a shortspear (what used to be called a halfspear in 3.0)...

Agh. Yeah.

When he asked "You can't take more than one ranged attack per round with spears?", and then started using "shortspear", I slipped into 3E terminology.

Shortspears in 3E, now known as Spears in 3.5, require a full round action to throw, as two-handed weapons.

Halfspears from 3E, now known as Shortspears in 3.5, require a normal ranged attack to throw, as one-handed weapons.

The initial posts on the topic were talking about throwing "Spears or Javelins" - 'Shortspear' didn't come up until Ysgarran's last post.

I'll edit for clarity.

-Hyp.

 

[AeroDm]

Here is what you do-

Carry around 20+ crossbows and get quickdraw. Anticipate all battles (including ambushes) and load all of them ahead of time. Then in battle just quickdraw between crossbows and your problem is solved.

 

[LokiDR]

Thrown weapons have their nitch for other applications. Take a rogue or monk, for example. That rogue with TWF, PBS, Rapid Shot, and Far Shot gets 2 extra attacks. Add improved and greater TWF and you get a lot of sneak attack. The monk can flurry with shuriken. Bows are not the best option for these characters.

Likewise, pistol-grip crossbows with a reloading mechanism or magic work with TWF and RS. A fighter can get a lot of milage out of those extra attacks. It balances like pistols + d20 modern rules but has much more of a fantasy feel.

 

[clark411]

What are those doohicks that let you throw spears a long distance )? I mean the sticks with a lil spoonlike notch at a point that cradle thrown weapons... Anyway, those things could make spears or javelins roughly comparable to arrows, and would make an interesting bit of alternative flavor. Similarly, you could allow the doohicks to be enchanted as bows are, their enchantments affecting their ammunition.

Just set em up as a 1d8+Str, and depending on the range of the javelins, double or triple the range of the things until a force of doohickmen can roughly match a force of bowmen.

 

[Hypersmurf]

What are those doohicks that let you throw spears a long distance?

Atlatl.

-Hyp.

 

[OfRiceAndHen]

I can up with something a couple weeks ago and posted it in the rules forum here.

Take it or leave it, but it's something in the xbow department.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Simple: Why are bows great
1) They reload freely
2) They get strength bonus

Erm. That's pretty much it. We can live with a differing damage die I think.

Problem: Bows are martial, crossbows and slings are simple - bows have to be better.

Solution: Give slings and crossbows 'hybrid' status, like the bastard sword. ie - if they're used with simple weapon proficiency or no proficiency at all, it's a move-equivalent action to reload them. If they're used with the appropriate martial weapon proficiency, they're free to reload like bows.

Additionally, allow the creation of strength crossbows - only the strength is required to load them, not fire them.

Sure that means there's the possibility of someone with a low strength getting someone with a high strength to load their crossbow... but frankly who cares? If someone wants to go to that level of complexity, fine - I honestly can't think of any game-breakers when you go in this direction.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I'd also change returning to return immediately after each throw, otherwise it's a useless enchantment.

At which point it's incredibly over-powered.

Our cleric of Moradin doesn't seem to think his dwarven hammer is "useless" when it returns.

There's a weapon ability called "Quick Returning" in one splatbook or another. (I lose track, because I read so many sources.) I believe it's a +3 equivalent, as it should be.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Just to clear up a misconception I've seen mentioned a few times, I'll point out that a mid- to high-pull recurve bow (say 70 pounds plus) hits with approximately the same force (by area) as a .45 ACP slug, at any reasonable tactical combat range.

Strong bows penetrate armor just as well as crossbows do; better, at point-blank ranges.

A crossbow's big advantage over the bow is the flat trajectory and stable firing platform, which translates into "Simple Weapon Proficiency."

As for suggestions to even things out, I'd do two things, separately or in combination:

(1) Up the damage for the crossbow, as several folks suggested. The easiest way to do this is to assume that all light crossbows hit with Strength 14, and all heavy crossbows hit with Strength 16. (You could also give a virtual Rapid Reload feat free to crossbow users with 14 or 16 Strength, respectively. That might be too much; I dunno. The thing folks -- including me -- tend to forget when they worry about high-Strength archers is that those archers are only using half of their Strength bonus (the damage half), which is a pretty major balancing factor right there.)

(2) Recognize the immense amount of training that is required to use a bow effectively -- especially a powerful bow -- by requiring another proficiency. Maybe just do it for mighty bows. That'll even things out nicely with other missile weapons, but might screw too much with the balance with melee in your game.