Crossbows and why the rules shortchange them.

[Aaron2]

But a crossbow is quite simply an improvement over a bow for ease of use. Once loaded, it's much harder to mess up. The bolt is snug in its little home awaiting ejection.

The bolt was hardly snug. It was often just sitting in a slot.

When firing a crossbow, your sighted directly along the shaft of the bolt. With a bow, the shaft is to the side of your eye, so you have to do more than just point the arrow at the target. Plus the crossbow had a flatter trajectory so accounting for range wasn't as important.

I wrote some new crossbow rules that had various strength xbows and various means of spanning them; from pulling the string back with your hands (taking one move action) to using a complex mechanical device like a windlass (taking 4 move actions). A character with a Str of 10 could span a light crossbow (1d8 damage) with his bare hands but needed a windlass to span a heavy crossbow (1d12). Unfortunately, my web page recently disappeared when I switched providers so it is no longer available. I can send them by email.


Aaron (akkala@cyberramp.net)

 

[DanMcS]

I think the damage of the crossbow is too low, tho, it should be more like 2d6 for the light one and 4d6 for the heavy version. There's quite some power behind those little bolts, and there must be a reason you cannot normally pull back the string without a lever or winch.

It's the same reason a weakling can't even string the bow of a hero like Odysseus. It's a mighty bow. Give crossbows an effective strength bonus rather than just increasing the dice, just like a mighty longbow lets you use your strength bonus to damage. But with a crossbow, even a str 10 average guy gets the strength bonus to damage, because he's using a tool to pull back the string. I'd give light crossbows a +1 to damage, and heavy a +2.

 

[DreamChaser]

It's the same reason a weakling can't even string the bow of a hero like Odysseus. It's a mighty bow. Give crossbows an effective strength bonus rather than just increasing the dice, just like a mighty longbow lets you use your strength bonus to damage. But with a crossbow, even a str 10 average guy gets the strength bonus to damage, because he's using a tool to pull back the string. I'd give light crossbows a +1 to damage, and heavy a +2.

why have it set? let the player pay for heavy pull x bows (just like mighty bows) if they want. Light xbows should cap at a +2 or +3 and heavy at +5 or +6. Hand xbows shouldn't be mighty.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

Well, high quality medieval plate armour can easily deflect Xbow bolts or longbow arrows even at surprisingly short distances, you gotta be lucky to hit in a penetrating way... but that's not the point

I think the crossbow rules are fine... it's more the typical hitpoint problem of D&D. And nearly all other weaponstyles offer possibilities how to increase the weapon damage. For bows, they even invented these silly mighty composite rules. All other weapons allow several attacks. Only crossbows are screwed nearly in both regards.

Edit: Thanee, I would prefer 1d20 for heavy and 2d8 for light crossbows as well as longer reloading times for both.

Correction: A 5'5" to 6' long bow of primitive design with a clothyard shaft and narrow pt (not the typical broadleaf head) can penetrate an inch of modern plate steel at less than 25 yards... Medieval plate can't stop that --- deflect, rob of power, etc. but not stop.

On-Topic:
X-Bows are a) easier to use and b) do more damage on the short to medium distance than a long bow.

(a) is covered by the requisite weapon category - simple vs martial
(b) is covered by the difference in range of the two weapons (not sufficiently in my opinion, but that's what they tried to do)

In my personal opinion, the crossbow should do more damage than the long bow at any comparative distance. Why? The long bow was (in the real world) a 'mass fire' weapon. Whole blocks of archers lined up and fired en masse to 300-500 yards, decimating whole blocks of other troops.

A lone archer vs a charging knight knows that odds are pretty much stacked against him (unless he thinks to shoot the horse or something) because even a solid body hit isn't going to stop that charge - he will get hit with something, even if he waits until 25 yards (ignoring the fact that a 'good' marksman could have been drilling arrows into the guy at 1 for every 100' that horse moved).

A lone crossbowman on the other hand, can put his first shot directly into the guys chest and have a distinct possibility of knocking him right off the horse. If he chooses to shoot the horse in the chest, that horse isn't going to hit him.

Compare the lbs per square inch force delivery of a bow/arrow head to the xbow's/bolt head. The bolt is _much_ higher. In ballistics terms, it's almost like comparing a .45 caliber to a .45 Magnum - or, even better, firing an armor piercing shell at a human vs a hollow nosed shell. The first doesn't deliver a whole lot of shock - the second delivers it's entire kinetic velocity as shock

That's why I agree - the xbows should get a + to damage anywhere within the first range increment. I like Thanees 2d6 and 4d6 - but then I'll pt out if you grant a heavy xbow 4d6 damage - every single character will walk around with one because you've said it does more damage than a great sword... at range Heck, if I had a GS fighter, I'd still carry abour 4 heavy xbows, loaded. Shoot first - 4 4d6 shots later, if it isn't dead, I'll hack it Then spend the next hour reloading, of course.

 

[Darklone]

Tilla: Note the use of the word deflect in my post Btw, some Dutch scientists claimed to have experiments that longbows weren't able to penetrate steelplates at all...

On topic:
Introduce rules about not carrying loaded crossbows (they'll get weak after some time). After all, there was a reason why noone did that.

 

[rrealm]

I too think crossbows are underrated. What if 10' were added onto the range increment of each crossbow and as long as you were in your shortest range, you get either a +1 or +2 to damage to represent the force behind the bolt but since bolts were not as aerodynamic as arrows were, they loose their momentum fast (which is why you don’t get the damage bonus unless in short range). Hand crossbows would gain no bonus damage since the projectile is so small.

IMO, a mighty ___ bow is still a better choice for a strong character since you would always get the damage bonus.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

Tilla: Note the use of the word deflect in my post Btw, some Dutch scientists claimed to have experiments that longbows weren't able to penetrate steelplates at all...

On topic:
Introduce rules about not carrying loaded crossbows (they'll get weak after some time). After all, there was a reason why noone did that.

What?? They Didn't?? According to Hollywood, EVERYONE rode around with a crossbow loaded up!!

Seriously though - there's a simple explanation - it's twofold. 1: If loaded, you 'had' to carry the earlier crossbows, the bolt would fall out the open slot (later crossbows fixed this, but the bolt was never really 'secured' in the modern sense) becase 2: There was no such thing as a safety on medieval crossbows.

The fighter I mentioned was a sardonic commentary on powergamers (no offense to any such) and probably wouldn't be allowed in my game (What's the system for figuring accidental discharge?? Or Bolt falling out??)

Ah well - the system in the RAW works (if not exactly as one might wish) so I'll stick with that...

 

[daTim]

Well, most plate armor was angled in such a way on the breast plate as to deflect arrows/bolts/swords. A show on the History channel showed how plate armor made in the 1400's could deflect .22 calibur bullets shot from a handgun. It ended up being because most guns we fire today (exlcuding most rifles) are weaker in sheer force than old arquebus's that shot 1/2 inch balls of nasty lead.

Not to say it wouldnt knock you unconcious...

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Crossbows

I have to check at home, but I found some rules on the web concerning bows and crossbows.. basically the authors concept is that bows use thier own strength to provide the damage dealing force. He has one chart showing the various strengths and damage. Crossbows, due to thier design, simply are rated at a higher strength.

I will try to remember where I stashed it.

 

[kolikeos]

But a crossbow is quite simply an improvement over a bow for ease of use. Once loaded, it's much harder to mess up.

thats why it is a simple weapon and not matial like the bow.