bludgeoning arrows?

[Christian Walker]

"Back in the day" I recall a supplement that suggested arrows with a rounded tip, kind of bulbous. It was designed to deliver bludgeoning, rather than piercing, damage. Perfect for trashing skeletons!

Has anyone seen something like this for 3.5?

If not, I was thinking about house ruling it. Maybe dropping the range of the bow by half, and limiting the damage to d3 bludgeoning for a short bow, d4 bludgeoning for a long bow.

Thoughts?

 

[Norfleet]

That's just silly. The difficulty in striking a skeleton with arrows is not because the skeleton is bony and bones are more resistant to piercing, but because skeletons are mostly hollow. Thus, when arrows are shot at it, they tend to go through the empty spaces rather than puncturing something. Blunt-arrows would do absolutely nothing to change this: Arrows are still more likely to go through the skeleton than to strike it. Blunt instruments work well on skeletons not only due to the fact that blunt weapons function by crushing the bones of the target, and skeletons are all bones, but because they are wielded with a clubbing motion that doesn't tend to go through the target. Firing a musket at a skeleton would suffer from the same hollowness effect.

 

[Shadowdweller]

Wrong.

Skeletons have no greater AC against piercing or slashing attacks. But they do have damage reduction (3.5) or a special ability that halves damage (3.0). This doesn't have ANYTHING to do with having lots of space in them...since slashing damage suffers the same penalties.

The damage reduction/ability is because skeletons lack flesh and fleshy organs. Damaging attacks that primarily rely on these are ineffective because bone doesn't cut well. This is directly stated under the damage reduction entry for skeletons.

Blunt, bludgeoning arrows actually exist in real life. However, given the relative mass of an arrow (not to mention the real-world effects of such things) I can't imagine them doing anything other than subdual damage. Which a skeleton, being undead, is immune to. Or at least that's how I'd decide things in my own games.

 

[Darklone]

There are ball arrows in the KPG. Damage 1d4, -2 to hit.

 

[Pagan priest]

Excuse me but, "KPG"?

 

[Darklone]

Kalamar Players Guide

 

[Norfleet]

Wrong.

Skeletons have no greater AC against piercing or slashing attacks. But they do have damage reduction (3.5) or a special ability that halves damage (3.0). This doesn't have ANYTHING to do with having lots of space in them...since slashing damage suffers the same penalties.

The damage reduction/ability is because skeletons lack flesh and fleshy organs. Damaging attacks that primarily rely on these are ineffective because bone doesn't cut well. This is directly stated under the damage reduction entry for skeletons.

Sure, that's what the entry in the manual says, but a bit of common sense will quickly tell you that there's more to it than that. Have you ever even tried something like this?

One of the most distressing tendencies I've found in 3E is the way that, with hidebound rules for nearly everything, anything NOT encompassed within the rules becomes forbidden or impossible, and nobody even bothers to look at the underlying reasoning behind them anymore. Is this supposed to be a PnP RPG, run by real humans who have an idea and a mental image of what's happening, or a video game run entirely by a computer?

 

[Darklone]

Sorry Norfleet, but exactly this kind of ideal and mental image for what's happening led me to create my houserule in 3.0 for DR10/piercing and DR5/slashing for skeletons and DR5/bludgeoning for zombies...

Just look at it that way. One pretty typical weapon for thrusts: the rapier. Try to damage a skeleton with a rapier, it's nearly easier to do it with your fist...
The rule is kinda silly for piercing polearms though.

 

[Norfleet]

Sorry Norfleet, but exactly this kind of ideal and mental image for what's happening led me to create my houserule in 3.0 for DR10/piercing and DR5/slashing for skeletons and DR5/bludgeoning for zombies...

Just look at it that way. One pretty typical weapon for thrusts: the rapier. Try to damage a skeleton with a rapier, it's nearly easier to do it with your fist...
The rule is kinda silly for piercing polearms though.

What are you apologizing to me for? I'm the one supporting that viewpoint. Of course, the idea that a "bludgeoning" arrow somehow functions any differently than a "piercing" arrow is somewhat silly.

 

[pingpong]

Have you ever even tried something like this?

attacking a skeleton with a bludgeoning arrow? have you?

Cool!