My crossbows

[gpetruc]

I'll make a list of all the kind of crossbows that will exist in my world.

The basic crossbows are:
Hand crossbow:[/B] exotic, tiny, damage 1d6, crit 19-20/x2, range 30ft, reload as move action
Light crossbow:[/B] simple, small, damage 1d8, crit 19-20/x2, range 80ft, reload as move action
Heavy crossbow: simple, medium, damage 2d6, crit 20/x3, range 120ft, reload as full round action
Great crossbow (or siege crossbow): martial, large, 2d8, crit 20/x4, range 160ft, reload as two full round actions (but two characters working together can reload it in one full round)

The possible advancements are:
Repeating crossbow
These crossbows can fire up to 5 shots before reloading (that is a full round action). Only hand and light crossbows can be made repeating.
The type changes to exotic.
Double crossbow
A bit like some gunpowder rifles, the double crossbow has two triggers and to bows, and so is able to fire two shots before reloading. Great crossbows cannot be double.
The two bolts can be fired at once (not requiring a full attack) at a single target of size Medium or greater, or at two targets standing adiacent. There is a -2 penality to hit and a critical of 20/x2. In case of special damage such as sneak attack, only the first bolt gets it.
Reloading a single bolt takes the normal time for that kind of crossbow, while reloading two takes double (note:two times a move action is a full round)
The type changes to exotic

Crossbow proficency
In primitive cultures the shortbow is simple and all crossbows are exotic.
In advanced cultures (such as some gnomish or dwarvish kingdoms), instead, hand the crossbow and all the double crossbows are simple, while the repeating ones are martial. Usually in these places bows are exotic weapons.

What do you think ?
(Note: please do not suggest to add armor penetration to crossbows; I feel that the normal D&D combat goes well)

 

[Tauric]

I like the cultural notes.

I don’t know if I would go with a Tiny 1d6 weapon. Knowing my characters, they would all want one, and it would lose any exotic flavor.

I do like the increased damage for a heavy crossbow (I might use it).

The siege bow won’t come up in my campaign, but it looks fine to me.

About the double crossbow: can you have mixed types of crossbows? I mean, can you have a heavy/light, or a light/hand combination? I know from experience that some shotguns, especially in the over/under configuration, sometimes mix gauges. I was just wondering if that would be possible.

Tauric

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I like the double and repeating crossbow rules. (I used something similar in the last game I ran--too bad none of the players opted to use them). Your rules for firing both crossbow bolts at the same time are a good deal better than mine were.

WRT the proficiencies, however, I don't think it's a good idea either in terms of game balance or the elusive common sense.

In game balance terms, proficiencies are selected in terms of balance. The crossbow is a simple weapon usable by all character classes and bows are martial weapons usable primarily by elves and the fighting classes (plus bards). Changing this designation deprives the fighting classes (for whom it is changed) of their most effective ranged weapons in return for weapons which will not be nearly as effective for them (since crossbows don't allow a strength bonus and their ability to make iterative attacks is limited). OTOH, by extending shortbow proficiency to simple, you give more effective weapons to primitive wizards, sorcerors, clerics, and monks. This isn't a huge effect on balance, but I don't think it's a good idea.

In terms of common sense, however, is where this breaks down. Although some weapons are martial or exotic as a matter of game balance rather than a matter of simplicity, the crossbow and bow class weapons aren't among them. Crossbows are simple because they were historically simple weapons which required little training. That they would be unfamiliar to primitive cultures wouldn't make them very hard to pick up and use effectively with minimal training. Similarly, although many primitive cultures were widely proficient with bows (although more were widely proficient with spears if I understand my anthropology correctly), that was a matter of constant training and not a matter of the bow's inherent simplicity. Although most Welsh trained with longbows, for instance, a Welsh monk might very well be unable to use a longbow effectively--(because he didn't practice long enough to gain proficiency before entering the monastery).

 

[Wolf72]

I like those!

I think I'd keep the crit range to 19-20/x2 when firing both for the double crossbow.

as for dmg, jmo ... I'd keep the original from the PHb (d4, d8, d10, d12) and S&F.

the repeating and double changes are great!

 

[gpetruc]

the fact that maybe 1d6 damage is much for a tiny weapon is probably true, but still I think that a hand crossbow should be better than a plain dagger (otherwise without poison a hand crossbow is nearly useless unless against kobolds).

The idea of mixing crossbow tipes in the double crossbow is nice, and I will probably use it. (but maybe with the restriction that there might be only one size increment between the two bows)

About the regional weapon proficiencies: In my campagin I use regional weapon proficiencies (and racial ones) to have more regional flavor (a bit like in FR). It might not be too balanced, but I hope that with my players it won't be a big problem.