Why can't crossbows be mighty?

[Goolpsy]

You should just leave the crossbows as they are (reasons above)

Whats the next thing; Axes with 19-20/x2 Crit? and Sword with x3?

 

[was]

-I think the crux of the matter is that bows are martial weapons, whereas crossbows are simple weapons. This is due to the fact that, while they are more complex weapon than the bow to construct, they are easier to operate. Thus, they are available to more classes without the need of taking an additional feat. (If, I am remembering things correctly)
-The power of a simple crossbow is subject to the tensile strength of its components not its wielder. It should be entirely possible to make a crossbow that has more power, but that would be much tougher to construct due to the increase in size and the complexity of the weapon. I would allow such a thing in my campaign if a player requested it, but would have difficulty in pricing it.

 

[warderbrad]

I have allowed players who make their x-bows out of Ironwood or sometimes even Darkwood to be able to make them with an inherant + Damage due to being stronger wood, however I also impose a Str requirement to keep the reload time the same. For Ironwood I use a +2 Damage and a 16 Str and for Darkwood I use a +1 and 14 Str.

 

[Krug]

-I think the crux of the matter is that bows are martial weapons, whereas crossbows are simple weapons. This is due to the fact that, while they are more complex weapon than the bow to construct, they are easier to operate. Thus, they are available to more classes without the need of taking an additional feat. (If, I am remembering things correctly)
-The power of a simple crossbow is subject to the tensile strength of its components not its wielder. It should be entirely possible to make a crossbow that has more power, but that would be much tougher to construct due to the increase in size and the complexity of the weapon. I would allow such a thing in my campaign if a player requested it, but would have difficulty in pricing it.

I don't see why one couldn't use the same cost as the one for composite bows; +100 gp for each additional point of damage, up to a cap of +3 perhaps.

 

[was]

I don't see why one couldn't use the same cost as the one for composite bows; +100 gp for each additional point of damage, up to a cap of +3 perhaps.

The cost wouldn't be the same because mighty crossbows would be harder to construct. The price in the PHB doesn't reflect this difference in the price of normal crossbows because they are more commonly used. Mass production decreases the price. However, in this case you are dealing in a specialty item with very few consumers. Thus, you wouldn't see the price decline.

 

[Wolf72]

I like thanee's suggestion ...

each +1 of dmg (dm sets a reasonable max) is one more round/standard action for a person to use the winch/reload ...

so a mighty x-bow +2 means a n/pc could spend +2 rounds on the reload, but then it also does +2 on dmg.

seems a fair trade off ... keep the x-bow loaded means a potentially good first shot.

hand crossbow: max of +1
light crossbow: max of +3
heavy crossbow: max of +5

not available for repeating crossbows.

my 2 cp

 

[genshou]

One alternative system would grant crossbows equivalent DR due to the nature of its design. The bigger and mightier the crossbow, the more DR it can overcome. Or perhaps it can ignore certain amounts of AC from armour. Perhaps 1 point per +2 strength.

D

That's what I do in Pledge of Tyranny–I use vitality/wounds, so armor provides DR against wound damage, or in other words "real hits." If you are wearing full plate, you get 1d4+4 DR against any given attack which deals wound damage. Some weapons (such as crossbows and firearms) have an Armor Piercing (AP) rating which is subracted from armor DR value. I set the AP rating for all crossbows at -5. On an average damage roll, a light crossbow deals 4.5 damage. On an average armor roll, full plate provides a DR rating of 6.5. That means that most light crossbow bolts will fail to overcome full plate's DR without the AP rating. With it, said attack would deal 3 wound damage as it punched straight through the poor target's armor.

These rules are nice because they provide a way to counter high DR ratings (this is a high-magic setting, unusual for vp/wp), and they don't make the crossbow any deadlier than a bow against unarmored targets.

If making a variant of these rules for a standard hit point and armor system, I would rule that a hand or light crossbow gains up to a +2 bonus to attack rolls against targets wearing armor or gaining an armor bonus from a spell or magic item (but never more than the armor bonus of that armor), and heavy or great crossbows can extend the bonus as high as +4. Shields would be unaffected.