New respect for crossbows

[Wolf72]

what harlock said ...

I would expect crossbow stats to be slighty different for d20 modern than 3/3.5e

 

[Aloïsius]

Interesting thing - there are many locations in America where "Archaic" weapons (from crossbows and swords to black-powder muzzle-load pistols) are not governed by the same laws as modern firearms. I wonder how much that holds true for other countries such as Australia, Great Britain, and France as well?

I don't know for other country, here in France we have eight categories, including everything from knife to armored tank and NBC protection suit. I think crossbow are in the same category than knives or tear gaz bombs (6th). So it's the same law, but it's not the same law. Anyway, when in doubt, chance are great that "it's not legal, but no one care".

 

[LGodamus]

I hate to bring it up here as this is a real life tradgedy ,but there is a feat in Plot&Poison that allows you to fire a projectile through one target and into another similar to cleave. There is also a counterpart to great cleave there as well.

 

[MerakSpielman]

This is a little off-topic, but does anybody know exactly where the American "right to bear arms" ends? I mean, I know you can own a handgun, shotgun, rifle or similar small arms.

Does it cover hand weapons, like knives, daggers, or (potentially) swords? Other "non-firearm" weapons? People wander around with visible weapons (especially in Texas) in their vehicles, or on their persons (concealing a weapon is a crime in most cases, actually). Is it just as legal to wander around with a sheathed sword or battleaxe?

Guns must be registered (which actually caused a HUGE debate about constitutionality back in the early 20th century). How about bows and crossbows?

Clearly there are military-grade weapons that the public cannot legally buy. Grenades, RPGs, large-caliber fully automatic machine guns, surface-to-air missile batteries, F-16s, nukes, etc...

Where is the line drawn?

If I'm hijacking the thread too much, just smack me down and ignore me.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I don't know for other country, here in France we have eight categories, including everything from knife to armored tank and NBC protection suit. I think crossbow are in the same category than knives or tear gaz bombs (6th). So it's the same law, but it's not the same law. Anyway, when in doubt, chance are great that "it's not legal, but no one care".

Interesting. Is the 1st or the 8th category the most deadly? What sort of weapons are placed in the least-deadly category?

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

A local cop here in Alabama told me that it was perfectly legal to walk down the street with a katana strapped to my hip. This was a concern as myself and many of my friends are martial artists and it was fairly common for us to have a backseat full of bladed nasties as we cruised down the road.

As long as you don't threaten anyone with it, or try to conceal it, it is cool.

On a side note, any privately owned business can tell you to get out, and maybe have you arrested for "disturbing the peace" so I wouldn't suggest going armed into say... Wal-Mart.

 

[Mercule]

This is a little off-topic, but does anybody know exactly where the American "right to bear arms" ends? I mean, I know you can own a handgun, shotgun, rifle or similar small arms.

This is the real meat of the argument. I'm not sure there is much in the way of Federal statutes regarding this, although the military grade weapons are probably controlled at that level. Most of the regulation occurs at the state level, as it should in a federal system.

For example, to the best of my understanding, Iowa (my state) is pretty similar to how Alabama was described. IIRC, we have some law against double-edged blades under 6 inches (covers stilleto switchblades and boot knives) or something like that, but a sword is just fine. Likewise, you can walk around with a .357 on your hip all you want, so long as it isn't concealed -- just don't expect a warm reception at Olive Garden.

The tricky thing about the "right to bear arms", regardless of what you think it means, is that the ordinance available in 2003 is significantly different than in 1783. Even if you believe that the 2nd Amendment represents the fact that all Americans are called upon to defend the nation or that it is supposed to be our protection against tyranny, the fact of the matter is that a nuke is somewhat overboard. A patriot missle is probably not appropriate, either.

That's where most of the laws come in. Which weapons are protected and which are the equivalent of "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theatre"? Almost certainly, there are some laws that violate the intent of the 2nd Amendment and should be struck down, but there are also some reasonable restrictions (see the aforementioned nuke).

In general, I'd consider "arms" to include swords, knives, crossbows, etc. Probably the best place to think of the line (IMHO) is to determine what could be considered "personal" arms. Thus, swords, knives, pistols, rifles, and even uzis are protected while missles, tanks, cannons, gattling guns, etc. are restricted. Of course, there are many people who disagree (especially with the uzis), some of their views turn into laws. It's then up to the courts to determine whether the Constitution prohibits those laws.

Sorry to ramble on, but your phrasing evoked the Constitution and its interpretations as much as other law.

The short, quick answer to "what's allowed in America" is that it depends on where you're at.

 

[mkarol]

The short, quick answer to "what's allowed in America" is that it depends on where you're at.

To continue the highjack…

… technically, the US 2nd amendment right to bear arms is a right of the _states_ to keep militia and not allow the Federal government to restrict states from protecting themselves from Federal action. See United States v. Miller, 207 U.S. 174 (1939). This means that a state could, within its borders, regulate ‘arms’ in any way including an outright ban. In general, blades and projectiles are regulated in different manners and the 2nd applies to arms consistent with a military, para-military, or marginally military usage (as perceived by today’s standards). There is also an attempt or discussion of extension of the 2nd as a right to self protection (which, imho, it clearly is not).

Recently, the 5th US Circuit Court (New Orleans, LA) ruled that the 2nd applies to _individuals_ and not to states. US v. Emerson 270 F.3d 203. That means that in the 5th district (I don't know which states that is) states can not unduly burden the right to bear arms; but the definition of ‘unduly’ has not been written.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Interesting. Is the 1st or the 8th category the most deadly? What sort of weapons are placed in the least-deadly category?

According to the French Embassy
http://www.info-france-usa.org/intheus/customs/6000.asp

Category VIII (Curios, Relics, Replicas and Unserviceable Firearms)
i.e.:
- any firearm of a model designed prior to 1870 (1886 for French Military firearms) and manufactured before 1892;
- any firearm rendered permanently inoperable or checked by the Testing Center of Saint-Étienne;
- replicas of models designed prior to 1870 and incapable of firing cartridges with a metallic hull or casing.

Category I includes machine guns and submachineguns.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Well, I'm sure plenty of folks out there know this about crossbows... but, back when they first came into widespread use, crossbows were considered almost unfair by many elite warriors/knights. Firing a bow effectively took some training, and many bows could not penetrate the heavy armors that knights often wore. However, with the crossbow allowed a relatively little trained peasant the ability to kill a knight with one flick of the switch.

(and, if you think d8 is low for a crossbow, try a crossbow in 1E or 2E!)