Mechanically Differentiating Bows, Crossbows and Slings

[El Mahdi]

Another differentiation between slings and bows/crossbows, is that bows/crossbows are piercing damage, whereas slings are blunt force damage...

For slings using larger ammunition: Yes, they would be blunt force damage. However, smaller ammunition at shorter range (or at extreme range where gravity is the biggest contributor to velocity) were definitely penetrative weapons...same as early, low powered firearms.

Wounds from sling bullets also had the added advantage (for the force using slings) of being harder to remove than arrows, being nearly identical to early, low-powered but large-calibre, gunshot wounds.

 

[ydirbut]

The way it works in D&D 3e is reasonably good:

Sling: Simple weapon, 1d4+Str damage, decent range, x2 crit. Slow reload - move action. Also, the sling has easy-to-find ammo - in general you should be able to scavenge up suitable stones.

Light Crossbow: Simple weapon, 1d8 (no Str) damage, better range, 19-20 crit. Slow reload - move action. And the crossbow needs specialised ammo - you can only replenish while in civilised parts*.

Heavy Crossbow: As the light crossbow, but 1d10 damage and an even slower reload.

Shortbow: Martial weapon, 1d6 damage (no Str by default), better range, x3 crit. Fast reload. And the bow requires specialised ammo - you can only replenish while in civilised parts*.

Longbow: As shortbow, but 1d8 damage and slightly better range.

* Okay, a skilled character may be able to build his own. But that takes significant time, which the sling doesn't require.

If you don't have any sort of weapon proficiency system, I would advocate dropping the damage dice of the bows by a step - shortbows to 1d6 (no Str) and longbows to 1d8. If you don't have any sort of improved criticals (whether 19-20 ranges, x3 multipliers, or extra dice on a crit), then I would suggest increasing sling damage to 1d6+Str. And if you allow all missile weapons to add Dex to damage (as I do in my own game... incidentally, the same will apply if you allow them all to add Str, or similar), then I would suggest dropping the slow reload for the sling.

(And let's face it - tracking ammo is a pain. Better to drop that if we can...)

Putting all those options together, I would suggest:

Sling: 1d6+Dex damage, decent range.

Light crossbow: 1d8+Dex damage, better range, slow reload.

Heavy crossbow: As light crossbow, but 1d10 damage and slower reload.

Shortbow: 1d4+Dex damage, better range.

Longbow: As shortbow, but 1d6 damage.

That would seem to give reasonable differentiation - the crossbows are best for pure damage, but they're slow, the bow trades raw damage for range, while the sling is the good middle-of-the-road candidate.

That help any?

Yeah, the current system I have does something like that.

Bows add your strength to damage and can pierce armor on a critical hit. But, they take a penalty to use unless you are an elite bowman.

Crossbows-Pierce armor on a normal hit and ignore armor on a critical hit. But, they have to be reloaded, and can only fire every other turn. ( I know that English longbows were just as good at piercing armor and most crossbows, but A) English Longbows didn't exist in the classical period and B) Again, I'd like to differentiate them without making one option simply better)

Slings deal less damage than a bow, but don't take a penalty, and can daze on a critical hit. (Maybe I could reverse this, and have slings be less accurate but more damaging or vice versa?)

I think you have to choose whether you're trying to provide a tactical option or recreate a specific period of history.

As much as I can, I'd like to do both. I think in this case, the two complement each other: If slings are a viable weapon, then they provide another option for the players (fulfilling criterion A) while also encouraging players to emulate the time period (fulfilling criterion B). In addition, having slings as a viable weapon will help differentiate the setting from a standard D&D setting.

I say that because the development of weapons has been, well, an arms race It means weapons become redundant - superceded by better weapons. Modern infantry are not armed with slings because semi-automatic rifles are simply better.

I completely agree. However, If I had said "Hey Guys, help me differentiate Guns from Bows." I don't think it would have been reasonable to say "Oh, there is no reason to use a Bow instead of a M-16. And Since guns eventually superseded Bows as weapons, Bow were always worse than guns and guns should always be better." (I don't mean to construct a straw man argument here, so my apologies.)

So my point is that either the mechanics are used to balance weapons tactically or they model weapons historically, but I don't think they can do both.

Realism is not my goal so much as genre emulation. (Although I did mention realism in my first post, I suppose.) I would like to have at least a loose grounding in real life, but strict realism definitely takes second place to A) Genre Emulation and B)balance/player options.

 

[Klaus]

Depending on how detailed/tactical your system is, you could consider the archer's advantage over the crossbowman in, you know, archery. That is, arcing their shot. Bows can overcome a certain amount of cover, because you can arc the shot over the cover, whereas crossbows are designed for direct fire. If you're looking for some differentiation other than rate of fire.

To expand on this thought, you might want to limit how far a bow can shoot based on the presence/absence of a ceiling. A crossbow would be best in cramped, indoors situation. A sling requires more room to whirl, but once loosed the shot goes in a straight line. Conversely, a bow is best when you are outdoors and have some distance between yourself and your target. Also, of all three, the sling makes the most noise (you wust whirl it a few times before shooting) and the crossbow takes the longest to reload (if you factor in the time a sling needs to build up speed, you might consider it equal to a crossbow in terms of "reloading" time).