Crossbows and why the rules shortchange them.

Thanee said:
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. ;)
Once you get into those ranges, you run into an issue I've always had with firearms - the impossibility of non-lethal hits. If you say a heavy crossbow is 4d6, then almost every single hit will drop a typical 5-HP 1st-level warrior. The heavy crossbow never hits non-lethal areas and never gives flesh wounds?

That's one reason why I like large die sizes more than multiple dice or bonuses to dice. Gives you a greater chance for the grazes and flesh wounds. Trying to stay within your ranges, I'd say d12 for a light crossbow and d20 for a heavy.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

IronWolf said:
All of this talk about crossbows has been quite interesting.

An interesting book about the subject is 'The Book of the Crossobow' by Ralph Payne-Gallwey. It covers the history of the crossbow (including comparitive notes to the longbow and shortbow), construction of of crossbows during medieval times and modern times (remembering though that the book was originally written in 1903 I believe) and even a section on seige engines of the medieval times.

It's probably worth a read for those interested of one viewpoint of how crossbows played a role in history.

I would also recommend the book -Weapons- by the Diagram Group.
 

Thanee said:
Actually a longbow has about the same penetration as a crossbow. Punches right through medieval plate armor.

A touch attack would be a bit much, however. In another game, these weapons ignore part of the protection armor grants, like half of its base (non-enhanced) armor bonus, which would sound about right, but doesn't fit all too well into the D&D system.

I think part of the problem is that armor AC in D20 right now is lumped together with other types of AC such as dodge.
Things are more clearly resolved, IMO, if armor grants DR. That sort of armor system would be more Rolemaster-ish, where shields protect you from getting hit, whereas armor changes the way you take hits.

Once we move to an Armor as DR system, missile weapon penetration can be implemented as a general Armor Piercing rule for types of weapons including stilettos and picks.
For example, the effective strength bonus (such as the fixed strength behind a crossbow or the strength in a bow) becomes the maximum about of armor DR that can be ignored. We set this amount as the maximum possible instead of a fixed armor penetration to account for hits that are not direct hits (perpendicular to the armor).
We also no longer have the problem of figuring out how much AC to avoid, as armor doesn't grant AC at all.
I would post my house rule, but it's wrapped up in other things in my "total conversion" set of house rules ("D20 Elements" - you can e-mail me at grail_quest@hotmail.com for a copy of the latest if you'd like to have a look).

Thanee said:
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.

Yes and no. Crossbows can have enormous draw weights (some frames are even of metal), BUT compared to a bow, because of the construction of a crossbow, the much higher draw weight does NOT give a directly proportionate increase in power. (I didn't read the full physics of it when I did some light research into crossbow and bows for my house rules, so I can't explain them to you here.)

And remember that a typical soldier might really only have 1d6 to 1d8 hit points. Even at 1d10, which I would consider high-end in my games, considering average hit points, ordinary bows and crossbows as they are could lay someone low and leave them dying with just one shot.

Further, there is the "blowthrough" effect. That is, damage really is localized. Even with lots of behind the shot, the most that would probably happen is the missile would go right through the target, which is not necessarily lots worse than having it stick in the target (and with the innovation of arrow points that point backward, quite often, arrows would be pushed right through in order to get them out of a target anyway--and those people can survive and the subsequent cauterizing of the wound!).
Unless you're looking at missiles that have the power of a .50 cal handgun or an anti-tank gun, you're probably not looking at such immense damage that a target would have body parts blasted off.

*

When it comes to drawing bows and reloading crossbows, a table comparing user strength and missile device strength can be made to determine how quickly one can reload and fire. One would be more lenient with crossbows, what with the various gimmicks out there to reload them, but speed would be awfully slow compared to a bow, though.
 

My advanced crossbow (arbalest) rules

This is for weapons resembling real late-medieval crossbows.

Arbalests - a progressive development of the heavy winch crossbow, Arbalests are restricted to military use only and may not be sold to private citizens, though they are occasionally available on the black market at considerable cost.

Light arbalest - the heaviest missile weapon that can be fired without a support, the light arbalest has a draw weight around 200lbs and takes 2 rounds to load by winch. They do 2d10 damage, with a range increment of 120'. They ignore 5 points of target armour.

Medium arbalest - the medium arbalest requires a light support 'foot' to fire from; although a strong man can carry both arbalest & support they are thus impractical as a skirmish weapon. The medium arbalest has a 300lb draw weight and does 3d10 damage, ignoring 8 points of target armour. They take 3 rounds to reload.

Heavy Arbalest - also known as the Siege Crossbow, this weapon is more a light ballista than a crossbow, it requires a heavy support 'foot' which requires its own bearer and is usually crewed by a two-man team on the battlefield. The heavy arbalest can easily kill a charging warhorse with a single shot. The heavy arbalest has a 400lb draw weight and does 4d10 damage, ignoring 10 points of target armour.. It takes 4 rounds to reload.
 

Brother MacLaren said:
Once you get into those ranges, you run into an issue I've always had with firearms - the impossibility of non-lethal hits. If you say a heavy crossbow is 4d6, then almost every single hit will drop a typical 5-HP 1st-level warrior. The heavy crossbow never hits non-lethal areas and never gives flesh wounds?

If a character only has 5hp then any hit from a heavy weapon is indeed a 'solid' hit - ie a lethal hit. Either they were hit full-on due to lack of dodging ability, or it was not an inherently lethal wound but the victim, unused to such injury, went into shock - this happens IRL a lot, many policemen have died from shock after accidentally shooting themselves in the foot with their own weapon. Tougher, more experienced troops won't die from such lesser injuries - in D&D terms, they are higher level with more hp, eg IMC the typical experienced warrior is 3rd level with 21 hp; a 1st-leveller with 5 hp is a green or novice soldier.
 

I’ve pulled out one of my old books called ‘Weapons: An International Encyclopaedia from 5000 BC to AD2000 - Revised Edition’, published in 1990 by The Diagram Group…

Good book; lots of stuff on ancient weaponry as expected.

Particularly good on crossbows.

So I thought I would share some of it…

History

12th Century: Common use throughout Europe
13th Century (Late): Replaced in England by the Longbow
14th Century (Early): Steel Bows fitted on Crossbows
16th Century: Replaced by Firearms

AD1139: Banned by Pope Innocent II​

Rates of Fire

Crossbow; 1/minute (4/minute using Belt & Claw instead of Windlass)
Longbow; 6/minute (12/minute at reduced accuracy)​

Spanning Devices

Stirrup & Hands
Belt & Claw
Cord & Pulley
Goatsfoot Lever
Push Lever
Windlass
Cranequin
Built-in Lever​

I could go into alot of detail about this stuff, but I don't have heaps of time available today... but hopefully it might point whoever needs it in the right direction... enjoy


.
 

Psimancer said:
I’ve pulled out one of my old books called ‘Weapons: An International Encyclopaedia from 5000 BC to AD2000 - Revised Edition’, published in 1990 by The Diagram Group…

Good book; lots of stuff on ancient weaponry as expected.

My problem with this book is that it only discusses weapons where there is a surviving example. Not that this is a bad road to take but it doesn't really inform the reader that this is the case. In any event, this book is well worth the $10 I paid for it. I use it mostly for its straight forward discussion of early firearms. I wish there was a similar book on armor.


Aaron
 


I too thought crossbows needed a boost, but I wanted to keep it simple. Here's my fix:

Light Crossbows deal 1d6+2 HP of damage.
Heavy Crossbows deal 1d6+4 HP of damage.

The pseudo-scientific reasoning being that the bolts are pretty small (low damage die) but they are delivered with great force (damage bonus).

(Obviously, if you agree with the mechanic but disagree with the reasoning, feel free to ignore that part of it - or make up your own - as it's not really important/necessary :) )
 

Thought about a new houserule yesterday...

Simply allow "advanced" Xbows to add 1.5 strength modifier to damage. THAT would help.
 

Remove ads

Top