Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Grassy Gnoll" data-source="post: 6733984" data-attributes="member: 6788652">I'm on the side of verisimilitude - and I'd argue that Paul Ming's "only one hand needs to fire" is off. A crossbow is a two handed weapon. I'm sure you could fire it one handed but id say there would be disadvantage as it's quite heavy and front-heavy at that, so it'll weave around a bit if you shoot it one handed. The same way you can shoot a shotgun one handed, but imagine putting a dirty great crosspiece on the end of the barrel, suddenly it needs a balancing hand.It's not based on anything other than visualising the action. But if there isn't a certain amount of "oh come now" verisimilitude, I personally find my suspension of disbelief broken. Things like magic don't necessarily have a real world physics to check against, but someone with a crossbow on one hand and a sword in the other managing to fire, slash, fire again? Hmm. Not for me.I'd allow a shield to be worn on the basis of the shield straps* are shoved up the forearm leaving a palm free to hold the crossbow steady, but not another weapon.*unless specifically called out by the player I rule that shields have one, usually two straps, and in normal use one strap is positioned so the forearm is through it and the other is held in the hand. If one strap, it is held but can be shoved up the arm if you need to hold something (but would make wielding a weapon almost possible to do effectively due to the embuggerance of the shield). I also tend to the view that shields are generally fairly sizable and not teeny wee buckles unless specifically called out as such.So sue me. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="😀" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" title="Grinning face    :grinning:" data-shortname=":grinning:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>

Verification