druids...and bows...and x-bows

[Zorkion]

do you think druids should be able to use bows? i personally do.

 

[Chauzu]

Bows, but no crossbows.

 

[SpringPlum]

No to both. Bows and X-bows are hunting implements. Although a horn bow might be interesting.

 

[Hammerhead]

What's wrong with hunting? A druid seeks to be PART of the natural order, not apart from it like some animal-hugging vegetarian wimp from PETA. Therefore, as a human, and a creature at the top of the conventional food chain, he should hunt.

Does a druid Flamestrike wolves when they bring down a deer? No, it's natural. There's no reason for him to detest hunting.

 

[jgbrowning]

No to both. Bows and X-bows are hunting implements. Although a horn bow might be interesting.

And who would know better how to hunt than a druid? (ok ok.. the ranger, but if i said 'who knows how to hunt better than the druid, well except for the ranger' that's not nearly as cool) Just because they protect nature doesn't mean they don't kill whatever they want to to eat it. That's all part of the cycle they're protecting as well.

joe b.

 

[Zorkion]

umm, forgive me for asking but, what exactly is a horn bow?and what stats does it have?

 

[Agamon]

No to both. Bows and X-bows are hunting implements.

And spears aren't? Druids can still hunt, it's a natual, instinctual thing to do. All of the preditory animals they protect do it. However, they wouldn't hunt for sport of course.

IMC, druids use bows (not x-bows, though), and I got rid of the sickle and scimitar, as they are celtic/1E artefacts that don't make any sense in my world.

 

[Michael Tree]

What do you mean by "be able to use"? If you mean "be proficient with" then they should be proficient in bows, but not crossbows. If you mean "should be able to use without losing all their spells and powers for 24 hours" then they should be able to use both, since it's ludicrous rule that I sincerely hope is eradicated from the game in D&D 3.5

 

[Zorkion]

What do you mean by "be able to use"? If you mean "be proficient with" then they should be proficient in bows, but not crossbows. If you mean "should be able to use without losing all their spells and powers for 24 hours" then they should be able to use both, since it's ludicrous rule that I sincerely hope is eradicated from the game in D&D 3.5

i mean should be able to use without losing all their spells and powers for 24 hours because it just dosent make sence, i mean, bows are some of the more nature-ish weapons out there

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I say no to any sort of bow, but the sling should have improved stats. In the hands of a proficient user a sling is a terribly deadly implement.

My only justifications for my position are:

I like the current balance of the Druid weapon list

The weapons on the list now all feel great for druids as they are either relatively easy to make or repair with little support or very durable and have heavy symbolic significance, though I'm a little iffy on scimitars truth be told.
Bows don't fit this as all bows save for, perhaps, the simplest hunting types are very sophisticated artifacts that require a lot of care, time, and equipment to maintain much less create. Think of the amount of stuff you need to fletch arrows, for instance, arrowheads, good feathers, good shafts, twine, glue, and all the equipment and materials needed to make the above and put it all together. A spear still takes a lot of work, but you're a lot less likely to have it lost or broken. Bows are generally for people who hunt in the grand style. Unless you're a savage barbarian or horse nomad. Peasants aren't likely to use them, and I think of the Druid as a humble sort of fellow. At least in his use of weapons and technology.
X-bows are simply too techy and new and expensive.

In specific settings I could see how bows or x-bows might work, but I like them absent in the generic version.