D&D 5E Bow vs. Crossbow

[Xeviat]

Hi Everyone. This one should be simple, but knowing forums it could blow up. Who knows?

So, before getting Extra Attack, what is the advantage to using a Bow over a Crossbow? I noticed this while helping a friend stat up a rogue. They were imagining using a shortbow the whole time, but when we got to the equipment they noticed the light crossbow did more damage. The loading drawback simply isn't a drawback until you get extra attack, and since a rogue never gets extra attack, it simply isn't an issue.

I realized that everyone under 5th level should be using a crossbow to be optimal. There's no advantage to using a bow.

This doesn't feel right.

 

[cbwjm]

Maybe range? Only thing I can really think of but even then, I'm not sure the long range of a longbow would really come up much to make it worth it.

 

[Shiroiken]

A lot of people (me especially) really hate the way they did a lot of the armor and weapons in 5E. You are correct that there's no reason for a rogue to use a shortbow rather than a light crossbow, so long as both options are available. Even an archery based warrior is better using a crossbow until level 5, but at that point investing in Crossbow Master is a good feat choice. The only real reason to do otherwise is for flavor, and some people have a hard time taking sub-optimal choices for flavor reasons.

IMO the crossbow should have been simple weapons (because they really are compared to bows), while the bows should have been martial, and both deal the same damage. The difference between the types would then be primarily the Heavy property. A bow would be better due to the lack of the loading property, but not better before the extra attack becomes available. This means that ranged warriors could use either equally, but would probably just start with a bow, since that's what they'd want at level 5 anyway. Rogues, Clerics, and other non-warrior classes could use crossbows for similar effect, with the loading property not interfering.

 

[Charlaquin]

A lot of people (me especially) really hate the way they did a lot of the armor and weapons in 5E. You are correct that there's no reason for a rogue to use a shortbow rather than a light crossbow, so long as both options are available. Even an archery based warrior is better using a crossbow until level 5, but at that point investing in Crossbow Master is a good feat choice. The only real reason to do otherwise is for flavor, and some people have a hard time taking sub-optimal choices for flavor reasons.

IMO the crossbow should have been simple weapons (because they really are compared to bows), while the bows should have been martial, and both deal the same damage. The difference between the types would then be primarily the Heavy property. A bow would be better due to the lack of the loading property, but not better before the extra attack becomes available. This means that ranged warriors could use either equally, but would probably just start with a bow, since that's what they'd want at level 5 anyway. Rogues, Clerics, and other non-warrior classes could use crossbows for similar effect, with the loading property not interfering.

The Heavy propery seems to be exclusive to Martial weapons... for... some reason...

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I think rogues only can use a hand crossbow which is the same damage as a shortbow but with less range and more weight.

 

[Xeviat]

I think rogues only can use a hand crossbow which is the same damage as a shortbow but with less range and more weight.

Light crossbows and short bows are simple weapons, so the rogue can use them. The rogue's proficiencies spell out the hand crossbow since it is a simple weapon.

A lot of people (me especially) really hate the way they did a lot of the armor and weapons in 5E. You are correct that there's no reason for a rogue to use a shortbow rather than a light crossbow, so long as both options are available. Even an archery based warrior is better using a crossbow until level 5, but at that point investing in Crossbow Master is a good feat choice. The only real reason to do otherwise is for flavor, and some people have a hard time taking sub-optimal choices for flavor reasons.

IMO the crossbow should have been simple weapons (because they really are compared to bows), while the bows should have been martial, and both deal the same damage. The difference between the types would then be primarily the Heavy property. A bow would be better due to the lack of the loading property, but not better before the extra attack becomes available. This means that ranged warriors could use either equally, but would probably just start with a bow, since that's what they'd want at level 5 anyway. Rogues, Clerics, and other non-warrior classes could use crossbows for similar effect, with the loading property not interfering.

I mostly agree that the crossbows should all be simple and the bows should all be martial. At first, I liked that the short bow was simple, because it was invented so early in human history. But, after looking at the time needed for crossbow training vs bow training, I'm more inclined to support it; the short bow can be humanity's first martial weapon.

The problem would then be that only halflings and gnomes would use shortbows and light crossbows, as the heavy property wouldn't really hurt medium-sized characters.

I'm really tempted to dusting off my 3.5E styled weapon table. I liked the choice between Threat Range or Crit Multiplier.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I didn't think rogues could use all simple weapons since they have a called out selection from the list, like the wizard. The cleric had the blanket "simple weapons".

I could be wrong, I'm working from DND Beyond and not my PHB.

 

[Charlaquin]

Light crossbows and short bows are simple weapons, so the rogue can use them. The rogue's proficiencies spell out the hand crossbow since it is a simple weapon.



I mostly agree that the crossbows should all be simple and the bows should all be martial. At first, I liked that the short bow was simple, because it was invented so early in human history. But, after looking at the time needed for crossbow training vs bow training, I'm more inclined to support it; the short bow can be humanity's first martial weapon.

The problem would then be that only halflings and gnomes would use shortbows and light crossbows, as the heavy property wouldn't really hurt medium-sized characters.

I'm really tempted to dusting off my 3.5E styled weapon table. I liked the choice between Threat Range or Crit Multiplier.

I’d suggest giving bows the Finesse property. A crossbow is drawn by mechanical power, so the effectiveness of a shot is all about precision (dexterity). But a bow is drawn by manpower alone, and how much damage you can do with one has as much to do with the draw weight you can handle (Strength). Realistically bows would have a minimum strength and a damage bonus that scales accordingly, but for simplicity’s sake, I think just slapping Finesse on them should suffice. Or go the 3.x route and have more expensive “compound” versions with Finesse.

 

[Xeviat]

I didn't think rogues could use all simple weapons since they have a called out selection from the list, like the wizard. The cleric had the blanket "simple weapons".

I could be wrong, I'm working from DND Beyond and not my PHB.

My PHB is right here. It specifically says:

"Weapons: Simple weapons, hand crossbows, longswords, rapiers, shortswords"

D&D Beyond says the exact same thing: "Simple weapons".

 

[Xeviat]

I’d suggest giving bows the Finesse property. A crossbow is drawn by mechanical power, so the effectiveness of a shot is all about precision (dexterity). But a bow is drawn by manpower alone, and how much damage you can do with one has as much to do with the draw weight you can handle (Strength). Realistically bows would have a minimum strength and a damage bonus that scales accordingly, but for simplicity’s sake, I think just slapping Finesse on them should suffice. Or go the 3.x route and have more expensive “compound” versions with Finesse.

What are you suggesting? Crossbows and bows both get to add Dexterity to hit and Damage. The Finesse property isn't a ranged thing, it's for melee weapons. The Thrown property uses Strength to hit and damage when a melee weapon is thrown as a ranged weapon, unless it has finesse (then you can use str or dex).

In 3E, ranged weapons didn't get an ability modifier to damage, except for composite bows, but that damage required strength. They still used Dex to hit.