Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 4764434" data-attributes="member: 59506">*sigh* I believe it goes without saying that if a bow is designed for strength, then the strength value of the bow is the minimum strength necessary to use the bow. I'm also pretty sure nobody said the opposite was true, especially since that's in the RAW, so I don't understand why there would be any frustration or exasperation expressed concerning that.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /> Also, why exactly would a compound bow be kind of funky? The draw weight of a compound bow still equates to the amount of force required to pull it back. The only advantage a compound bow has is once it's drawn, it only requires about 80% of the draw force to hold it drawn. Doesn't seem too hard to model with fantasy RPG mechanics. Since it requires less strength to hold a draw (not for the initial pull), then a bonus to hit, same as any other masterwork bow, shouldn't be outside of the realms of realism. Also, since even compound bows on the upper end of the draw strength spectrum, are still only about half as powerful as the upper capabilities of the famed British Longbow, I really don't see how they would be unbalancing or "not relevent" in a fantasy RPG.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /> Personally, I think it would be pretty cool to have a player character design themself a fantasy version of a compound bow. For me, the truly extraordinary thing is that anyone would be capable of effectively and accurately firing a bow with a pull of 180 to 200 pounds. If anything screams "fantasy", it's that. Yet the reality is that such extraordinary archers actually did exist with abilities that exceed the abilities of modern day archers. However, I think you are absolutely right that bows should be written to have a strength ability rating. Since this is the houserules forum, this also seems like the perfect place to discuss and develop exactly that. So again, I'm not sure why any posts or ideas on this subject should elicit frustration or exasperation.    So, in order to further the conversation on whether strength should make a difference on the range of a bow, I'd contribute this: If a bow has a strength rating (built for a minimum strength requirement that has a positive ability modifier - as per the RAW), then along with adding the equivalent ability modifier to any damage, it makes sense to me that the range of the bow could be increased. For that, I'd go with Hereticus's idea of adding an extra range increment for each +1 of the weapon (or if that's too much, one extra range increment for each +2 or +3). However, if someone of a higher strength than the minimum required for the bow uses the bow, then the range of the bow should not increase further (same as the RAW for extra damage with bows). Only the strength of the bow matters. As per the RAW, if someone posessing lower strength than the minimum strength of the bow, attempted to use the bow, then they suffer a -2 penalty (that is in addition to the -4 penalty if they are also non-proficient with the weapon). I don't see any reason why you couldn't houserule this to your -4 penalty (plus the non-proficiency penalty). Or even better, use the RAW's -2 penalty, plus an additional -1 for every point of difference between the strength modifier of the weapon and the strength modifier of the user (for example: a composite bow of strength 12, a +1 modifier, used by someone with a strength of 8, a -1 modifer, would have a penalty of -4 to use the bow - -2 from the rules, -2 for the difference in ability modifier). The addition of these few simple houserules, can very easily take care of any percieved wonkiness in the rules. I'm really not seeing how "the D&D rules have messed up so many peoples ideas about archery". However, I do find that idea "funny".</blockquote>

Verification