Why do Crossbows Suck?

[billd91]

And you really wouldn't be shooting sheep with a bow.

But if bows were really so clearly superior to crossbows, why have crossbow units at all, and why would they be so cheap? You'd think that a vastly superior force like this would be in very high demand, and thus command a much higher price.

Consider the geo-politics. Compared to virtually everyone else, England has always had manpower issues. Investing in mass numbers of cheap peasant levies or even mercenaries was not really on the table. Manpower-preserving strategies were pretty important. They invested in smaller numbers of higher value units. Everybody else, able to rely on larger continental population resources, could swing cheap manpower and as the Soviets proved when throwing poorly trained, poorly led, and poorly equipped Ivans at the Germans, quantity has a quality all its own.

 

[Ryujin]

The swiss used crossbows as part of their pike formations (and later phased them out for guns), but they were never hired for their crossbow skills alone.
The Italians on the other hand were hired specifically for their crossbows.

And yet the crossbows figured prominently, due to their effective use of them. Replacing them with the arquebus was a natural progression.

 

[pemerton]

That's odd. The Rules Cyclopedia lists staff as a d6 weapon. Perhaps there was errata to the earlier books?

I checked my books.

Moldvay Basic has slings as d4, no staves.

Cook/Marsh Expert has slings and staves both as d4.

RC has slings as d4, staves as d6. Perhaps the Mentzer revisions upped the damage for staves and this was incorporated into RC? I think the reason for staves being at d4 was to balance mages, by allowing them access to staves as well as daggers without increasing their melee damage output.

 

[Hussar]

In all this historical discussion we are ignoring important bits though, IMO. What about the shorter races? Wouldn't dwarves and gnomes be pretty heavily invested in creating better crossbows?

For dwarves and gnomes, a lot of underground fighting would be pretty short range- limit of dark vision and the like. Maybe a much heavier bolt with shorter range but more stopping power. That sort of thing.

 

[MoonSong]

In all this historical discussion we are ignoring important bits though, IMO. What about the shorter races? Wouldn't dwarves and gnomes be pretty heavily invested in creating better crossbows?

For dwarves and gnomes, a lot of underground fighting would be pretty short range- limit of dark vision and the like. Maybe a much heavier bolt with shorter range but more stopping power. That sort of thing.

Like the one in the Hobbit just more portable? that would be awesome! quick sell the idea to Paizo before someone beats you to the punch. (For the record this post features zero sarcasm, that is a very good idea nobody noticed before. I'm not a xbow fan, but having the fantasy equivalent of a rocket launcher is just pure win)

 

[Derren]

In all this historical discussion we are ignoring important bits though, IMO. What about the shorter races? Wouldn't dwarves and gnomes be pretty heavily invested in creating better crossbows?

For dwarves and gnomes, a lot of underground fighting would be pretty short range- limit of dark vision and the like. Maybe a much heavier bolt with shorter range but more stopping power. That sort of thing.

They would certainly invest more in crossbow than bows. Their short size would mean they couldn't use long bows anyway and being able to load a crossbow and keep it loaded would be an advantage when fighting around corners. Also, crossbows have a flatter trajectory than bows.

Still, it is still short range and low visibility which are not good conditions for ranged weapons, so even though they would prefer crossbows over bows ranger weapons in general wouldn't be used much. If they come up to the surface on the other hand they would certainly prefer crossbows over short bows.

Also some videos (no real expert but more of an informed hobbyist)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvTymyb1bBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z3RfHNq1Hc

 

[Ryujin]

They would certainly invest more in crossbow than bows. Their short size would mean they couldn't use long bows anyway and being able to load a crossbow and keep it loaded would be an advantage when fighting around corners. Also, crossbows have a flatter trajectory than bows.

Still, it is still short range and low visibility which are not good conditions for ranged weapons, so even though they would prefer crossbows over bows ranger weapons in general wouldn't be used much. If they come up to the surface on the other hand they would certainly prefer crossbows over short bows.

Also some videos (no real expert but more of an informed hobbyist)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvTymyb1bBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z3RfHNq1Hc

All of the figures that I've had of Dwarven missile users have always been crossbowmen. It struck me that Gnomes and Dwarves, as natural engineers, would gravitate to a more mechanical weapon than a stick with a string.

I posted some Lindybeige earlier in the thread. He's my favourite Monty Python loving, role playing historian.