D&D 5E Strength bows?

[El Mahdi]

If people have a hard time imagining reloading the crossbow one handed, I would look to over the top action movies for inspiration, you tube videos of one handed people doing amazing tasks, or just try and use your imagination and think that might be a brace of bolts and cocking mechanism on the characters hip maybe built into the holster for the pistol.

First, a brace of bolts and cocking mechanism would definitely make for a non-standard piece of equipment, and should be paid for as such.

Second, the Feat says nothing about special equipment.

Third, I can use my imagination...thank you very much...and even my imagination knows, this just is not possible.



Lastly, I challenge you to find even one video of someone doing what you propose. One video of somebody loading a hand crossbow with the same hand holding the crossbow, while also doing this faster than a normal load (which is what the crossbow expert feat provides), and do it to a hand crossbow in each hand.

I'm betting you'll have better luck proving the existence of the Loch Ness Monster.


P.S.: You would never be able to do any of those actions you describe at my table, and RAW backs me up. But again, do whatever you want at your table or whatever you can get another DM to allow you to do. You can even "persist" in your illusion you're playing by RAW. Nothing however, will change that you're not.


Enjoy your game. I'm done.

 

[El Mahdi]

Where does the Loading property focus on time and free hands? The Loading property mentions neither.

First, I said the loading property does NOT focus on hands at all. That means no accession has been made in the rules for a same-hand load. Common sense prevails in this case.

Second, the load property description leads off with "Because of the TIME required to load this weapon..."

It most certainly does focus on time.

What's interesting about two-weapon fighting only applying to melee is you get the same result with the Crossbow Expert feat. The feat gives you a bonus action and allows you to ignore the normal limitation of one shot per weapon. The Ammunition property states that drawing and firing (in the middle of which would be loading or knocking) are part of a single attack. Ignoring the Loading property simply lets you do it multiple times per turn.

I agree with all of this; though contingent upon having a hand available to load the weapon with. There's just no getting around that, and nothing in the rules or feats that negate this.

So, holding one hand-crossbow, AND having a hand free to load it, you can reload it and shoot it again in the same round, if you have a reason for a bonus action or extra attack...exactly as the Crossbow Expert Feat intended.

However, holding two hand-crossbows, you can shoot both...again, if you have a reason for a bonus action or extra attack...but can only reload one that same turn, and only do so by dropping one of them.

On that, if we are single-wielding a hand-crossbow we get one attack per attack allowed by our class (1 at first, 2 at 5th, etc...) and one bonus attack, this also satisfies the "free hand" requirement you keep mentioning that I keep not seeing in the rules. With dual-wielding hand-crossbows we get exactly the same result X attacks per our class limitations and one bonus attack, this time thanks to having an offhand weapon instead of the effect of Crossbow Expert.

It is literally the EXACT SAME RESULT.

No it isn't. It's only the exact same result if you drop one of the hand-crossbows after having shot it.

Also, I did read the two-weapon fighting rules and I have no idea why it's applied to melee only. I suppose it could be the "free hand" assumption you're going on but I've yet to find that explicitly stated. I think I'll ignore that, since dual-hand-crossbowing is pretty epic.

You go right ahead. It's your game and your table (unless playing with another DM).

You can do anything you want in your game.

I'm simply not going to tell you that it's RAW when it's not.



Enjoy your game. I'm done.

 

[Paraxis]

P.S.: You would never be able to do any of those actions you describe at my table, and RAW backs me up. But again, do whatever you want at your table or whatever you can get another DM to allow you to do. You can even "persist" in your illusion you're playing by RAW. Nothing however, will change that you're not.

Enjoy your game. I'm done.

There is no rule anywhere in the book that says you need any number of hands free or otherwise to reload a weapon. Please show me where the RAW says you need even a single hand free to load a heavy crossbow. It is assumed that because the crossbow uses two hands to use that reloading it does also, same with bows. They never mention needing a free hand to reload a sling or hand crossbow, not ever in any part of the rules. So we could assume much like with a heavy crossbow it uses the same number of hands to reload as it does to fire, or you could assume it takes both hands to do so. Either way you or I would be making an assumption.

RAW means exactly that, rules as written. Sense there are no rules covering exactly how many free hands it takes to reload a sling or hand crossbow, then at best it is a judgment call not a RAW situation.

I will cite the two handed property under weapons for my RAW reasoning it only takes one hand to reload a hand crossbow or sling.

Two-Handed. This weapon requires two hands to use.

Since a hand crossbow doesn't have this property or any other wording anywhere else in the rules suggesting it takes more than one hand to properly use such a weapon, I am left with the conclusion that a one handed man can fully operate a hand crossbow just as fast and as well as a man holding a shield in his off hand.

 

[Athinar]

Don't use Common Sense if you say you can NOT make a Ranged Sneak Attack with a Dagger

 

[Sunseeker]

First, I said the loading property does NOT focus on hands at all. That means no accession has been made in the rules for a same-hand load. Common sense prevails in this case.

I disagree, D&D is a game of exceptions. If there is no rule that states a certain thing, then the default reasoning is that thing is not required. Otherwise it would state that that thing IS required, and there would be an exception for situations in which it is not.

Second, the load property description leads off with "Because of the TIME required to load this weapon..."

It most certainly does focus on time.

The entirety of the the Loading property is disregarded by the Crossbow Expert feat. You keep trying to say that something applies to a situation where the rules say it does not. Either the whole rule applies, or with the feat it does not. The feat does not cancel out part of the rules.

I agree with all of this; though contingent upon having a hand available to load the weapon with. There's just no getting around that, and nothing in the rules or feats that negate this.

There is also nothing in the rules that support it. You keep assuming that something is required when it is not stated to be as such. If it were required, it would be stated.

So, holding one hand-crossbow, AND having a hand free to load it, you can reload it and shoot it again in the same round, if you have a reason for a bonus action or extra attack...exactly as the Crossbow Expert Feat intended.

However, holding two hand-crossbows, you can shoot both...again, if you have a reason for a bonus action or extra attack...but can only reload one that same turn, and only do so by dropping one of them.

Only if you assume magical faires exist and what you believe is in the rules was actually there. It's not, so your BELIEF that it does is NOT VALID.

You go right ahead. It's your game and your table (unless playing with another DM).

You can do anything you want in your game.

I'm simply not going to tell you that it's RAW when it's not.

Well considering you're making up what you think is in the RAW, you're probably not the best person to tell me what is or isn't in RAW.

Enjoy your game. I'm done.

Well someone sure needs a cookie.

 

[Allen Ballard]

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.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

This thread is from two years ago: - you might want to start a new thread if you want to discuss this.

Personally though, I houserule that bows can use either Str or Dex to hit and damage.
Oh, and hand crossbows don't generally exist in my games.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm working out the details on an archer I'm building.

I remember in 2e, there were bows that could be built to take advantage of a characters high STR score. I think they had this in 3e as well.

Does this exist in 5e? As I said, I'm working out the details on an archer I'm building, and I'll definitely give him a higher STR if it will affect archery.

Thanks!

It doesn't exist in 5E; all you need for archery is Dex.

I do rather like the idea, though. Maybe a greatbow that does 1d10 damage and uses your Str mod instead of your Dex mod on damage rolls? (The higher base damage is to compensate for requiring two different stats to be effective.) It'd make a good long-range option for Strength fighters.

 

[LapBandit]

The modifier was Mighty in 3.X / Pathfinder I believe. Mighty +1 would let you add +1 of your STR bonus to damage. This is easily replicated in D&D 5E with higher draw weight bows without magic. Perhaps the bow or the bowstring would be a bit exotic/non-standard, but should be accessible. STR is already the red-headed step child of physical stats in 5E compared to DEX, throwing it this bone doesn't really change anything.

 

[Arilyn]

Problem with bows realistically is you would need either wisdom or intelligence for aiming (judging wind, etc.), dex to handle bow with finesse and str for pull and damage. I guess you could use wis for attack roll and str for dam. That might be an interesting change. Once you are used to handling a bow, perception and judgement might be more important than your dex, and low str characters shouldn't be able to handle a decent bow at all.