Sage Advice (18 May 2015)

I can't believe they went that way with hand crossbows.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Don't you think a long lived race like drow could construct a highly effective hand crossbow capable of fairly rapid use?

Just as plausible as the dwarven craftsman.

...or the short lived humans...

*coughcough-chu-ko-nu-coughcough*

 

[famousringo]

...or the short lived humans...

*coughcough-chu-ko-nu-coughcough*

That's very much a two-handed weapon. It's not comparable to the single-handed firing of a hand crossbow, nor the power and range of the light and heavy crossbows described in the PHB.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That's very much a two-handed weapon. It's not comparable to the single-handed firing of a hand crossbow, nor the power and range of the light and heavy crossbows described in the PHB.

That's not the point: the science & engineering behind making a repeating crossbow was fully understood by humans who only lived 1/10th of the span of a Dwarf or 1/22th the life of an Elf. IOW, extraordinary longevity is NOT requried.

Scaling it down to a hand held size and making it operate one-handed would have been merely a matter of time, but the events post Boxer Rebellion and the increasing efficacy of black powder weaponry basically rendered that line of research unimportant.

...but it didn't kill it. A while back, I was reading on a weapons forum about members looking for one of their number who had worked out a rope system that allowed him to fire & cock a repeating crossbow one handed. As of my reading, they hadn't found him, but in my mind, I can see the cocking mechanism operating by flexing and straightening the arm.

So again, longevity isn't a prereq, just an inquisitive mind.

 

[famousringo]

That's not the point: the science & engineering behind making a repeating crossbow was fully understood by humans who only lived 1/10th of the span of a Dwarf or 1/22th the life of an Elf. IOW, extraordinary longevity is NOT requried.

Scaling it down to a hand held size and making it operate one-handed would have been merely a matter of time, but the events post Boxer Rebellion and the increasing efficacy of black powder weaponry basically rendered that line of research unimportant.

...but it didn't kill it. A while back, I was reading on a weapons forum about members looking for one of their number who had worked out a rope system that allowed him to fire & cock a repeating crossbow one handed. As of my reading, they hadn't found him, but in my mind, I can see the cocking mechanism operating by flexing and straightening the arm.

So again, longevity isn't a prereq, just an inquisitive mind.

Ah, point taken. I was speaking more to the need to find a mechanical genius with access to tools and materials beyond the capability of your typical pre-industrial society more than any need for longevity.

Your arm-powered cocking mechanism sounds awkward and unreliable. In other words, gnomish.

 

[Umbran]

Your arm-powered cocking mechanism sounds awkward and unreliable. In other words, gnomish.

Hey! Gnomes may be unreliable, but they are often quite deft and graceful.

 

[guachi]

I wouldn't interpret the word "when" to imply any kind of causality or as necessitating a particular order of events. To me, it means "at the time", which would imply you can take the bonus action on the same turn as you take the attack action. I don't think it matters what order you do it in. It seems to me that all that's required is you have a free hand when you take the bonus action so you can reload. And remember we're not talking about two-weapon fighting here. You can't use a hand crossbow in two-weapon fighting because it's not a melee weapon.



I'm not sure if this is in direct response to my post. If you read it again you'll see that I accounted for the crossbow being loaded before the bonus attack occurrs, as in the statement "fire and load", meaning to fire an already loaded crossbow and then reload it as per Crawford's clarification of the ammunition property.

The bonus action shield bash from shield mastery has a similar trigger to the bonus action attack from crossbow mastery. Since the rules state that if the timing isn't specified on a bonus action you can choose the sequence. When I asked online what people would rule about the shield bash most used that rule to say that you could do the bash and then the required attack.

I tweeted Crawford and he eventually replied and said the same thing, which isn't surprising because it's, you know, the rule.

So by analogy, I'd agree with you and say the timing doesn't matter for the bonus attack.

 

[mlund]

Even the full-sized man-portable repeating crossbow was so weak it was almost worthless against medium/heavy armor. You had to use poison hand hope for a grazing injury.

You just can't cheat physics without magic. The energy for each shot has to come from somewhere, or in this case someone. The longbow is your most efficient ratio of force / time. The crossbow's mechanics are dedicated to allowing you to store the potential energy temporarily and deliver it on a more stable platform. Systems with levers and cranks allow you to store more energy than a single draw, which is how they defeat armor (like properly riveted mail) that even the strongest longbow can't hope to penetrate. However, none of these innovations are free. You can give up power for speed or speed for power but you can't have both unless you introduce an external power source. That's one of the reasons the proper medieval heavy-crossbow (the one that killed knights) was typically operated by a 3-man team of an archer and two assistants.

Crossbows that a single man can draw are either weak (like weaker than a javelin, but less cumbersome) or take a relatively long time to cock compared to operating a regular bow. Expertise pushes the envelope far enough just letting crossbows keep up with the rate of fire of a normal bow. There's no physics to support one-handed loading semi-auto pistol bow-guns for John Woo antics in D&D.

Pew-pew laser crossbow sounds like a fund idea for a magic item, though. Magic items are supposed to break physics over their knee.

Marty Lund

 

[CapnZapp]

I'm not a crossbow expert myself, but I'm pretty sure that this is not at all realistic or (at least for my game) reasonable. Crossbows aren't easy and quick to cock; that's why they used to have a fire rate of 1 every other round.

You can't just look at half of the realism equation.

On one hand, yes, crossbows are slow. But on the other hand, one hit was usually enough to maim or kill even an experienced armored foe.

In D&D a weapon firing every other round is worthless. Having crossbows around is fun, so we drop the realistic loading times.

 

[fuindordm]

They wouldn't be worthless if the hit were sufficiently devastating, but no edition of D&D has given heavy crossbows that punch.
ROF 1/2, damage 1d20 might be a reasonable tradeoff. Or possibly 1d10 damage and an armor-piercing mechanic (e.g. ignores piercing resistance, +2 to hit vs heavy armor...)

 

[CapnZapp]

They wouldn't be worthless if the hit were sufficiently devastating, but no edition of D&D has given heavy crossbows that punch.
ROF 1/2, damage 1d20 might be a reasonable tradeoff. Or possibly 1d10 damage and an armor-piercing mechanic (e.g. ignores piercing resistance, +2 to hit vs heavy armor...)

D20 would of course make the weapon fearsome.

To a first level character or noname NPC.

But it would still be worthless to a fighter doing three attacks a round, fighting dragons and giants with well over a hundred hit points.

My point isn't to discuss how to balance a slow-firing crossbow, or even to argue it can't be done.

My point is: WHY make it slow to fire? It's realistic, sure, BUT THE REST OF THE GAME ISN'T.

Don't just look at rate of fire. Also look at how the game models damage and health.

And if you do, you will quickly realize that it is perfectly reasonable to speed up the crossbow.

If you want anyone to use them, that is.