Skulker's Bow: Is it balanced?

[Truename]

A player in my game wants to play an archer ranger multiclassed with rogue. To make this easier, he'd like a Load Free ranged weapon that he can also use for Sneak Attack (so he can avoid the drop/draw/shoot/put away/pick up dance). He has a great character concept, so I want to let him do it, but I want to do it in a way that won't be unbalancing.

Here's the weapon I came up with. It's basically a longbow, but it's a superior weapon, so it takes a feat (that could have been spent on a greatbow). Is this balanced--not too powerful, but also not too weak?

Skulker's Bow
A pulley system allows this small metal bow to pack the punch of a bow twice its size.

Superior two-handed ranged weapon
Cost: 30 gp
Damage: 1d10
Proficient: +2
Range: 20/40
Weight: 3 lb.

This small bow may be hidden under a cloak, but it has the power of a longbow. A rogue proficient with the skulker's bow can treat it as a crossbow for the purpose of the Sneak Attack class feature.

Properties: Load free
Group: Bow

 

[Starglim]

Sorry, don't know that dance. Does he really try enough ranged attacks in the near vicinity of melee that he's losing more than one or two minor actions a combat on it, but still can't spare a feat for Quick Draw or carry backup melee weapons?

This basically upgrades his Sneak Attack weapon by a die step - which would be comparable with the rapier among superior weapons - plus the Load Free property, which, as mentioned, compensates for his not spending a feat on Quick Draw. That might be OK.

This device sounds more complicated to construct than a longbow - say increase the price to 35gp - and I would want to drop the range to match the shortbow, since it doesn't sound like a long-distance weapon.

 

[CapnZapp]

Sorry, what's the problem you're trying to solve?

That the character feels forced to switch between bow and blade every now and again? Or that the character wishes to avoid OAs when making ranged attacks in melee?

Why not simply be an archer who uses his bow for Sneak Attacks?

 

[Talon378]

To answer your question, I do not think that this is unbalanced, i just think it is unecessary. As a multi classed rogue, he is only able to use his Rogue's sneak attack ability once per Encounter. Forcing him to spend two minor actions to draw his crossbow and load it in not unreasonable. I am personally stunned that someone would want to cross train from a ranger to Rogue myself, as that seems to be a major duplication of what he does to begin with.

The solution to this quandry is in the rules already, actually. Just tell the player to go ahead and use a Crossbow for his Ranger ranged powers. An Archer Ranger does not have to use a bow. He can use the crossbow for both his sneak attack, and for the Ranger powers and be home free without having to spend the extra feat for a superior weapon.

 

[PowerToast]

It's basically a feat to allow sneak attacks with long bows, which is fine, considering that he could be spending that feat to gain Greatbow Proficiency. Looks alright to me!

Edit: After looking at Tunnel Stalker and the like, you might consider reducing sneak attack damage by one die if you are worried about balance issues. That being said, I think it'd be fine since he'll only sneak attack once per encounter.

 

[Truename]

Edit: After looking at Tunnel Stalker and the like, you might consider reducing sneak attack damage by one die if you are worried about balance issues. That being said, I think it'd be fine since he'll only sneak attack once per encounter.

Good point. I'm not going to worry about it for this character (as you said, there's only one sneak attack per encounter), but if the rogue in the party wants one, I'll have to rethink.

Thanks!