Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thorvald Kviksverd" data-source="post: 484999" data-attributes="member: 1495">Oh, I don't know...In England, yeoman werew required by law to practice, practice, practice with the longbow indefinitely, in order to achieve and maintain the ability to strike a man-sized target at 200 paces or so.I think most of our experience (including mine) in scouts and what not, is with a bow of 1/2 or 1/3 the draw weight (or even less), and against a target much nearer--not to mention, one not intent on killing us.(Note: This is leaving aside the issue of modern compound bows and pin sights.)As for crossbows, they are extremely easy to aim at short range, but are much less so at longer ranges due to the trajectory.As a final observation, short(self)bows were extremely common hunting wepons with the untrained masses.Now, how to model all of this if you're attempting to reflect this in your game?How about something like this...Crossbows and Shortbows used with simple proficiency have a penalty of -3 per range increment, rather than -2.&nbsp; While those used with martial proficiency suffer the standard -2.Longbows used with simple proficiency have a range increment penalty of -4, those with martial a -3, and those with exotic have the standard -2.Or something like that--I haven't looked at a 3e PHB in quite a while.Note:&nbsp; I'm not saying this should be a general change in the rules.&nbsp; It's just an attempt to model the 'reality' I posited. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thorvald Kviksverd, post: 484999, member: 1495"] Oh, I don't know... In England, yeoman werew required by law to practice, practice, practice with the longbow indefinitely, in order to achieve and maintain the ability to strike a man-sized target at 200 paces or so. I think most of our experience (including mine) in scouts and what not, is with a bow of 1/2 or 1/3 the draw weight (or even less), and against a target much nearer--not to mention, one not intent on killing us. (Note: This is leaving aside the issue of modern compound bows and pin sights.) As for crossbows, they [i]are[/i] extremely easy to aim at short range, but are much less so at longer ranges due to the trajectory. As a final observation, short(self)bows were extremely common hunting wepons with the untrained masses. Now, how to model all of this if you're attempting to reflect this in your game? How about something like this... Crossbows and Shortbows used with simple proficiency have a penalty of -3 per range increment, rather than -2. While those used with martial proficiency suffer the standard -2. Longbows used with simple proficiency have a range increment penalty of -4, those with martial a -3, and those with exotic have the standard -2. Or something like that--I haven't looked at a 3e PHB in quite a while. Note: I'm not saying this should be a general change in the rules. It's just an attempt to model the 'reality' I posited. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification