composite bows

[irdeggman]

Yup, and if you call it a "+8 bow" you are partly to blame. It's a mighty composite longbow (+8 str bonus).

Fixed this for you.

"Mighty" does not exist in 3.5 (that was 3.0 terminology).

In 3.5 all composite bows have a strength rating.

 

[irdeggman]

By the crafting rules the DC to make a might bow is 15+(2xstr bonus), thus a mighty composite str bow +8 would require a DC 31 skill check. This makes the bow significantly more difficult to make than most other mundane items. So it would depend on the availability of highly skilled crafters to make the bow.

And that is the kicker.

DC 31 is considered "heroic" level of difficulty.

You also can not take 20 on a craft check since there is a penalty for failure.

 

[Folly]

I would think it would be reasonable to say someone that has a 21 craft check would be able to reasonable do it. So after skill focus you need 18. This would have to be achieve via a combination of ranks, stat mod, and magic. So if you campaign can get to that point either through magic or high enough level npc then it would be reasonable.

 

[MithrasRahl]

If Centaurs are common in this world, then it stands to reason there would be a supply of Composite bows for them to use to their full potential.

If your Centaur is a rarity, then it comes down to whether the DM allows anything to be bought so long as it follows the cost rules, or only allows things that would be there on his island.

 

[mvincent]

By the crafting rules the DC to make a might bow is 15+(2xstr bonus), thus a mighty composite str bow +8 would require a DC 31 skill check.

I guess this explains why giants throw rocks...

 

[moritheil]

Fixed this for you.

"Mighty" does not exist in 3.5 (that was 3.0 terminology).

In 3.5 all composite bows have a strength rating.

My groups use the "mighty" affix simply to emphasize the fact that there is strength damage counted. Otherwise we tend to forget and just roll base bow damage.

 

[Arkhandus]

A craftsman of sufficient skill to make such bows is going to be exceedingly rare.... You're talking about a 10th-level or so fellow, who for whatever reason is willing to waste his time on crafting 900-gp bows for other people rather than conquering some small town all by himself or making his own little barony or something.

By 10th, he could have 13 ranks, +3 Skill Focus, +2 MW Artisan's Tools, +2 Intelligence maybe, and +2 from an assistant Aiding Another. Or maybe it's a 10th-level Wizard with high Intelligence and all those ranks, tools, and feat. You can't really have a bunch of assistants aiding another, because there's a limit to how much help additional people will be in the crafting of one item (and we're not talking about building a house or something, we're talking about crafting a 5-8 foot long collection of composite materials in a stave-like form).

You might be able to assume 2-3 assistants could help with the task, but it's still a rather high-level craftsman doing the bulk of the work.

 

[mvincent]

My groups use the "mighty" affix simply to emphasize the fact that there is strength damage counted.

Doesn't the "composite" prefix accomplish that?

 

[moritheil]

Doesn't the "composite" prefix accomplish that?

I believe a composite longbow is distinct from a longbow even before the strength damage (slightly different range and cost.)

 

[irdeggman]

I believe a composite longbow is distinct from a longbow even before the strength damage (slightly different range and cost.)

He's just trying to point out that by saying "composite" it includes a strength damage "automatically", so there is no need to include "mighty".

And as you point out a composite logbow is different that longbow.

Now I would guess that your group is using "mighty" as a carry over from 3.0, which is fine. It just isn't "proper" 3.5 terminology and can cause confusion to those who have never used the 3.0 rules and only have used the 3.5 ones.

Mighty isn't a listed weapon property in the 3.5 books afterall.