D&D 5E Strength bows?

[Slit518]

As far as I know, this game doesn't have the composite version of bows.

Composite bows tend to require a bit of muscle to pull back the string further.

If you were to do a Strength based bow, I would allow it to effect the hit (because of pulling the string back due to high strength), and damage (because the arrow is flying harder/faster/stronger because of string being pulled back).

But, to make up for this I would lower the accuracy on the bow (though I know a traditional composite bow could shoot further). Or even put a Strength requirement on it to take advantage of using the ability to add your strength modifier to hit/damage.

Composite Shortbow requires 13 strength

Composite Longbow requires 15 strength

If you lack the strength to use the bow, you can still use your Dexterity to hit, but not for damage, as you're not gaining the bow's benefit of the added drawback power.

 

[Xaelvaen]

For my homebrew, I added a Composite Bow designed to reward rangers who didn't want to strength dump - afterall, they should still want a decent Athletics.

Composite Longbow (14) - Requires Strength 14 or higher, has the normal range for a Longbow, and deals 1d10 damage instead of 1d8.
Composite Longbow (18) - Requires Strength 18 or higher, has the normal range for a Longbow, and deals 1d12 damage instead of 1d8.

They still use Dexterity for attack and damage modification. The approach I took increases the maximum damage by the strength modifier, but adds no minimum damage - effectively, 1/2 Strength mod to damage. I made them pretty pricey (and use a custom economy so money isn't so meaningless) for balance. It should also be noted that this method mimics their function from 3E, where a higher strength than the minimum didn't increase your damage output, you needed to buy a bigger, more expensive bow when your strength went up.

 

[Oofta]

What's with the thread necromancy lately?

Anyway, I just have a simple house rule. You can buy a reinforced bow that allows you to use strength instead of dexterity for attack and damage. It costs an extra 100 GP to craft per plus as it takes a very specialize craftsman and potentially exotic materials for more exotic bows. If you do not have the required strength you still add your strength modifier but your attacks are at disadvantage.

Not totally realistic, but realistic would be a combination of strength and dexterity.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do not see why a longbow (and only a longbow) could not be used by Strength and Dexterity a like. It seems only fair. Str characters should have a decent distance range weapon. Throwing things is not enough(plus they are not as cool). Just like dexterity has its crossover weapon to melee (the Rapier 1D8 finesese weapon). Strength based Charactersneeds one too(the Long Bow 1D8 ranger weapon). Just makes sense and that's how we play in my game. Its not OP the fighters are just happier with thier options.

Bows have a 'pull' that correlates directly to the strength of the archer. A bow with a much heavier pull than you can handle can't be used (or even strung) - a famed mythological example of this was the bow of Ulysses (Odysseus), which only he could string. A heavier pull means more energy imparted to the arrows, so greater range, and presumably, power. Conversely, if you use a lighter-pull bow, your extra strength won't impart much extra force on the arrows. Historically, well-trained archers were quite strong.

In AD&D, ranged attacks used DEX 'reaction/attacking modifier' to attack, and no bonus to damage, but there was an optional rule that you could use specially-made heavier ranged weapons to get the strength bonus to damage. Colloquially, we called 'em "Strength bows." In 3.0, they became a standard rule, IIRC, and were called 'Mighty.' The composite bows had the option of having the mighty quality for a specific strength.

That option is not present in 4e which used the 'heavy thrown' quality to give STR-based characters a ranged option. It was simpler, but it did kinda disadvantage them when it came to range. 5e continues that simplification with 'finesse' melee weapons and 'heavy thrown' ranged weapons giving DEX/STR exceptions based only on the weapon used. Unfortunately, that gives DEX an even greater advantage over STR, since the got-to finesse weapon is essentially equal to the best one-handed STR weapons, while the best heavy-thrown weapons are decidedly inferior to bows. And, it's arguably 'unrealistic,' that archers don't need any strength.

A simple way to get a STR-based archery option is to just create a bow - call it the Composite Bow or Mighty Bow or something - and give it the 'heavy thrown' property, so it can use STR, as well as ammunition and load - and the clear notation that you're not, in fact, throwing it.

Another simple option would just be to have all ranged weapon attacks use DEX for attack, and STR for damage.

For more complexity, give bows in general a pull, rated in STR, the bow gets it's rated STR bonus to damage, but if the wielder doesn't at least match the pull he has disadvantage (if weak enough, couldn't use the bow at all), and if his STR bonus is higher, still only gets the bow's rated damage bonus. The same kind of rule could work for crossbows, a STR minimum to load by hand, no STR min if you use mechanical assistance, but the load time is longer.

 

[smbakeresq]

The issue isn’t the weapons, it’s that a fighter with archery style and SS fear and a longbow for example is -3 to hit and +10 to damage at 600’ but a great weapon fighter with the GW feat is -5 to hit and +10 to damage standing next to you.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World

 

[Stalker0]

People complain a decent amount about bows vs melee anyway.

Maybe it makes sense to just drop the dex to damage on bows...and add strength mods to damage ala 3e.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Honestly I prefer the older way: dex to hit, str for damage. I wouldn't mind seeing that apply to finesse weapons as well. Would take some rejiggering of class designs to balance a few things, but one of the things I like least about 5e is the overlap between Str and Dex.

 

[clearstream]

Now if I had a fighter in my game that was strength based I could see me adding in a magic item like the following.

ODYSSEUS'S BOW
Weapon (bow), Legendary (require's attunement)
This magic bow can only be used by those with a 17 or higher strength. It is +1 to hit and adds the user's strength modifier to damage along with dexterity like normal. It does double damage to inanimate objects, rumored to have once puncturing holes through a dozen axe heads with ease.

I like the idea of giving the item as a magic weapon, perhaps also with some kind of mysterious - this weapon could go up in a puff of game balancing at any time - clause? "The Gods hand out such weapons rarely, and take them back according to the virtue of the wielder and their own inscrutable whims."

As a pedantic side-note, the axe-heads had holes already in them: the feat of Odysseus was one of accuracy not might. Although the hero was known for being mighty, too!

 

[schnee]

The issue isn’t the weapons, it’s that a fighter with archery style and SS fear and a longbow for example is -3 to hit and +10 to damage at 600’ but a great weapon fighter with the GW feat is -5 to hit and +10 to damage standing next to you.

You forget: Great Weapon Master you reroll 1 or 2 damage
That means the one-handed weapons are +1 damage, and a Greatsword skews up around +2 damage

So its -3/+10 vs. -5/+11 or -5/+12

And, you roll larger dice with melee weapons, so the damage is generally higher by several points more already (1d8 vs 1d10, 1d12, or 2d6)

And, missile weapons have defenses like Darkness, Fog Cloud and Wind Wall that cause Disadvantage that don't happen in melee

And Battlemaster Maneuvers can be applied to add even more damage like Riposte and Sweeping attack

And Paladins can Smite

So, it's a bit more complicated than that, and reducing it down to those two values isn't doing the game justice

 

[smbakeresq]

You forget: Great Weapon Master you reroll 1 or 2 damage
That means the one-handed weapons are +1 damage, and a Greatsword skews up around +2 damage

So its -3/+10 vs. -5/+11 or -5/+12

And, you roll larger dice with melee weapons, so the damage is even higher

And, missile weapons have defenses like Darkness, Fog Cloud and Wind Wall that cause Disadvantage that don't happen in melee

And Battlemaster Maneuvers can be applied to add even more damage like Riposte and Sweeping attack

And Paladins can Smite

So, it's a bit more complicated than that, and reducing it down to those two values isn't doing the game justice

I meant the feat, not the fighter ability. The fighter ability doesn’t add that much; IIRC for a 2d6 it improves average damage from 7 to 8.25, less for other weapons. It certainly doesn’t compensate for the archery +2 to hit, not even close. You know this because of the sudden proliferation of all the Archery builds out there for fighters exploiting that feat.

Archery should +2 to damage, like dueling, not +2 to hit. In a bounded accuracy system +2 to hit counts a lot more then +2 to damage. Besides, it’s just crazy that an Archer is more likely to hit a target at 600’ in 3/4 cover behind a wall then any attacker standing next to you. Anyone who takes Archery style is clearly going to take SS also. A human variant fighter at first level who takes SS will start out better than any elf at archery, whose race specializes in bows.

Sometimes I wonder if Wizards actually playtests all the stuff they release. I always thought they should be more open and get more feedback like the UA stuff does.

That’s why when I use the same abilities and feats against players who are new to my table they get incredibly pissed and cry foul the first time. You can’t do it often though, just for The Specials. In SKT the giants have several special attacks that are eye openers also and greatly change those encounters to where they should be.



As far as STR bows I have no problem, in fact I think bows should have STR requirement of at least 10, maybe higher for longbows, maybe 12. It does require a minimum STR to draw a bow. I see far to many bow users with 8 STR but maximized DEX. I also think crossbows should also allow you to add your STR to damage (in place of not in addition to your DEX) if you take the effort to seek out that special crossbow maker and spend the money and materials to have him build you one with increased power. Certainly they would never be widely available.

The above though is a rules and stat array problem. The game now is just focused on DEX since it counts for AC, Initiative, to hit and damage. No other ability gets more than 2 of those. Using stat arrays with the current rules set ENCOURAGES stat dumping, if you use stat arrays then you can’t complain against players following the rules. .