5e is simple but you could do Dex to hit and St to damage and fixed damage bonus on crossbows. It is not perfect but it is a bit different as it is not one simple rule to rule them all method.
5e is simple but you could do Dex to hit and St to damage and fixed damage bonus on crossbows. It is not perfect but it is a bit different as it is not one simple rule to rule them all method.
You'd probably also want a STR requirement for Longbow and Heavy Crossbow (or sacrifice time for windlass cranking). Might fit well in a low magic setting
If realism is something to strive for in this fantasy game ;-)
If realism is something to strive for in this fantasy game ;-)
Even if realism isn't a particular objective, the light fighter who is very accurate and hard to hit, but doesn't hit very hard and can't take a hit very well, vs the heavy fighter who is less accurate (and/or easier to dodge) and relatively easy to hit, but hits hard and can take a beating, is a standard cinematic trope that D&D doesn't really do.
It's not something that can easily be modeled without completely revamping the combat system, though -- systems that manage it almost always use an armor model where armor makes you take less damage, rather than making you harder to hit.
I love how people think Longbows are a single piece of wood instead of two. By the way, they are two, glued together. They are War Bows, which have a very different use than Composite Bows, which hunters use.
Only if you speak about Japanese bows. Those were laminated, but the European longbows weren't.
War bows are meant to shoot something heavy over a far distance without the user moving much... this also means they don't have much around them (which the OP alluded to). Atop a castle? You're in the open. In a field? You're in the open. On a hill? You're in the open.
Probably you missed, I wrote about adventures and not battles or sieges.
Composite bows on the other hand are meant for hunting. In the fields, in the bush, and in the forest. They're smaller so you can maneuver them, and they aren't made from glass, so they can take some abuse. They were popular through all of history, world wide before the modern compound bow came along for a reason.
They were intended for hunting in Germany, but also for fighting east of Germany. (And in many other places.)
Both self and composite bows are, initially, hunting bows that are then used in tribal conflicts as war weapons. As such they both started with draw weights in the 30-50 pound range as that is all that is needed to penetrate and kill game up through deer (as well as cloth or leather clad humans). With the advent of metallic and other harder armors two major changes occur with bows meant primarily for combat - both self and composite. The Draw weights increase to 100 pounds or more (some upto 200 pounds) and the arrow points change from relatively flat wide “arrowhead” types to narrow pointed “bodkin” style armor piercing points. While we (of Western European) background think primarily of the English longbow and the bodkin arrows of the 100 years war by the end of the war the French plate armors were generally impervious to the bodkin points. Did this make the longbow obsolete? Not really, while a single arrow to the chest might well be stopped and bounced off flights of hundreds to thousands of arrows will, naturally, find many weak/open spots doing tremendous damage to mass formations and to the masses of poorer armored foot soldiers that have made up the mass of most armies. The maximum flight range of both self and composite bows is in the 400-450 meter range (1200+ feet) , the 5e distance really represents the maximum you can hope to fire an aimed shot at.After that you are left with unarmed massed colleges at massed formations - which doesn’t really play into DnD gaming. Aimed fire however, even against plate armor can be detestation. In the longbow demonstration I saw, in addition to the 18 arrows into a chest sized target in 1 minute the archer took 3 slower shots at a 6” tall thumb sized stick at 100 meters and hit it all 3 times still in under 1 minute. Effectively these represent called shots at eyes or opened visors any of which would have either blinded, killed or done grave damage to the target. While shooting from horseback is typically somewhat less accurate we ( in DnD) can typically ignore it and so such feats of aimed fire should be equally possible for composite bow wielders. whether you allow composite bows is a DMs decision but if allowed adventurers who become aware of it should gravitate towards its use. A smaller bow with the same range and power that is more maneuverable in confined quarters, less likely to disturb foliage and destroy stealth and that functions as well as a longbow in all but the wettest conditions? What’s not to like? If your able to get hold of Sovereign glue to make your bow then even wet conditions no longer matter 😳😁 pits not traditional, but for practical adventuring it is about as ideal as you can get - maybe that’s why it was left out.
I can see the combining of the bonuses to speed things up instead of having a strength bonus for damage and a dex bonus to hit.
But the way things are going with the game they might as well make it an optional rule.
Since more and more people are using apps for this the calculations are no problem and back in the day I found the calculations were not hard done on paper. You really only did it once and wrote it down.
Though it could be abused to a point for all the other weapons. But only if its allowed to be. Could you imagine if each and every weapon had a to hit bonus and a separate damage bonus? Maybe only allow the separation for ranged weapons.
For archery I could see the strength modified bow as adding range also. Only to the long range distance. +1 dam bonus could give a 10% increase in range +2 bonus would add 20% and so on. But that might be to complex for some.
As for composite bows. Thats pretty much just flavor. The same as a short horse bow, a Japanese long bow or a recurve bow would be. Damage and range would be the same but the look changes.
Though it could be abused to a point for all the other weapons. But only if its allowed to be. Could you imagine if each and every weapon had a to hit bonus and a separate damage bonus?
Yes? AD&D, 3e, and 3.5e all did that. It's only marginally harder than existing calculations. The main problem it introduces is that it's adding multi-attribute-dependency to fighters, while leaving spellcasters with single-attribute-dependency.
Attack spells could be dex based, at least to hit, rather than caster stat based. Dex is great for most classes though.
There are a number of ways of doing it, but a key requirement would be for every spell to require two rolls, and currently non-damaging spells only require one.
Ranged attack spells would get to add Dex bonus. Simple, its a ranged attack.
This has nothing to do with two rolls. Its only added to a roll that is already happening.
As for a fighters ranged weapons. Like the strength enhanced bows the arrows would have to be specially made to match it. Thrown weapons would be the same, specially made and only usable by those with the required strength.
The fact that we are so far off topic now is proof that the idea of different to hit and damage bonuses is not a workable 5e "thing" . It was much easier in 1e-3.5e as you basically had your rolled stats the whole time. Yes, there were magic items that changed your stats but they were rare and therefore much more valuable. As a homebrew rule - especially for strengths above 20 I can see, As a DM, possibly granting the strength bonus instead of the dex bonus to arrows fired from a specially made bow. As I said above though, the reality generally is that they do the same damage but to potentially more than one foe (if lined up properly) and that sort of thing will probably always be a DM decision not a WOTC rule.
Your the only one setting up some strawman argument about firing some projectile through two different targets. No one else has even mentioned that is possible.
And why is it not possible to do that now? I could fire an arrow through someones hand or arm and hit the guy behind him right?
5e is simple but you could do Dex to hit and St to damage and fixed damage bonus on crossbows. It is not perfect but it is a bit different as it is not one simple rule to rule them all method.
You'd probably also want a STR requirement for Longbow and Heavy Crossbow (or sacrifice time for windlass cranking). Might fit well in a low magic setting
If realism is something to strive for in this fantasy game ;-)
I agree, when I first started playing at age 10-11 (around 78) it was very general (hack and slash) and as we got older we looked for more in the game, adding skills to AD&D more social encounters, linked adventures, etc.
But I always try and remember that there are lot of ways to play the game and how I RP'ed at the beginning and down threw the ages.
I also agree with the people who said materials and knowledge play a huge part in making good composite bows, it is not just glue, bone, wood and other good stuff and it is not that all the best components can be found everywhere.
In other games they have metal that is flexible, a fiberglass like material and magically strengthened in the right areas at the right time weapons but that is not really a direction 5e wants to go down or has the bonus range to play with. But you could still try and implement some rules that are more realistic then add some magic into the mix that would add some flavor and RP to the system. For example a Ranger spell that is a ritual that magically enhances the bow and string to do "something". Note it does not really need to enhance to hit bonus but could enhance range, protect from elements, enhance damage (either all the time or a more limited scope), etc.
Your the only one setting up some strawman argument about firing some projectile through two different targets. No one else has even mentioned that is possible.
And why is it not possible to do that now? I could fire an arrow through someones hand or arm and hit the guy behind him right?
Your DM can rule that you do - my point is/was that this actually constitutes an extra attack and 5e has no mechanism by RAW to get such attacks from missile (or Melee) combat. You could also potentially run a great sword through 2-3 people or cleave through multiple people with a great axe but there is no general mechanic to allow for such attacks and several special mechanics for it in special circumstances or with special powers. An ultra high strength bow, if allowed, should either grant such extra attacks for driving through foes OR grant extra damage based on the strength needed to pull the bow to full draw. neither has a RAW mechanic although either or both could be homebrewed by a DM. As to it being a straw man look back at one of my earlier posts - I make the point that armor piercing arrows from ultra strong bows have a similar problem to full metal jacket bullets from high velocity rifles - the damage they do to a single target is roughly the same as that done by a lower velocity FMJ slug from something like a pistol, but the high velocity slug is capable of penetrating more than one target if they are lined up properly and the low velocity slug can't. so yes I brought the argument up as I considered it a worthwhile consideration in the discussion, If you disagree you are certaainly free to ignore it.
It would be nice to have a bow that takes into account the characters strength bonus for damage.
Frankly before we even reach that point it would be nice if muscle-powered projectile weapons scaled their range with the user. As it is, the scaling is so absurdly missing that even if you have reach greater than 5' - e.g. by being a bugbear and attacking on-turn - you get no additional range with your thrown weapons, and no matter how hard you swing your sling, you'll chuck a rock the same distance as anyone else.
I THINK this is because WOTC has all the ranges a bit screwy - the longbow ranges make sense to me if - the normal range is maximum for accurate aimed fire, the long range is the range for maximum possible aimed fire (with disadvantage) becaue the maximum flight distance for the longbow (and composite bows) is around 1200 feet not 600.
so for military use you could be sending volleys of (unaimed) arrows between 1200 and 600 feet, trying to hit specific targets from 120 to 600 feet and hitting your specific target regularly or even making called shots within 120 feet. this is as much a matter of hand eye coordination as it is strength and so you don't get extra range but you do get the dex bonus and proficiency to hit.
IF we assume (dangerous I know) that the same things are happening with the other missile weapons then perhaps the ranges start to make sense. since adventurers aren't typically loosing voleys of arrows/sling stones/etc but are making single aimed shots.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Of course, you could not give it dexterity to damage, 3e didn't, but that has its own set of balance issues.
5e is simple but you could do Dex to hit and St to damage and fixed damage bonus on crossbows. It is not perfect but it is a bit different as it is not one simple rule to rule them all method.
You'd probably also want a STR requirement for Longbow and Heavy Crossbow (or sacrifice time for windlass cranking). Might fit well in a low magic setting
If realism is something to strive for in this fantasy game ;-)
Even if realism isn't a particular objective, the light fighter who is very accurate and hard to hit, but doesn't hit very hard and can't take a hit very well, vs the heavy fighter who is less accurate (and/or easier to dodge) and relatively easy to hit, but hits hard and can take a beating, is a standard cinematic trope that D&D doesn't really do.
It's not something that can easily be modeled without completely revamping the combat system, though -- systems that manage it almost always use an armor model where armor makes you take less damage, rather than making you harder to hit.
Only if you speak about Japanese bows. Those were laminated, but the European longbows weren't.
Probably you missed, I wrote about adventures and not battles or sieges.
They were intended for hunting in Germany, but also for fighting east of Germany. (And in many other places.)
Both self and composite bows are, initially, hunting bows that are then used in tribal conflicts as war weapons. As such they both started with draw weights in the 30-50 pound range as that is all that is needed to penetrate and kill game up through deer (as well as cloth or leather clad humans). With the advent of metallic and other harder armors two major changes occur with bows meant primarily for combat - both self and composite. The Draw weights increase to 100 pounds or more (some upto 200 pounds) and the arrow points change from relatively flat wide “arrowhead” types to narrow pointed “bodkin” style armor piercing points. While we (of Western European) background think primarily of the English longbow and the bodkin arrows of the 100 years war by the end of the war the French plate armors were generally impervious to the bodkin points. Did this make the longbow obsolete? Not really, while a single arrow to the chest might well be stopped and bounced off flights of hundreds to thousands of arrows will, naturally, find many weak/open spots doing tremendous damage to mass formations and to the masses of poorer armored foot soldiers that have made up the mass of most armies. The maximum flight range of both self and composite bows is in the 400-450 meter range (1200+ feet) , the 5e distance really represents the maximum you can hope to fire an aimed shot at.After that you are left with unarmed massed colleges at massed formations - which doesn’t really play into DnD gaming. Aimed fire however, even against plate armor can be detestation. In the longbow demonstration I saw, in addition to the 18 arrows into a chest sized target in 1 minute the archer took 3 slower shots at a 6” tall thumb sized stick at 100 meters and hit it all 3 times still in under 1 minute. Effectively these represent called shots at eyes or opened visors any of which would have either blinded, killed or done grave damage to the target. While shooting from horseback is typically somewhat less accurate we ( in DnD) can typically ignore it and so such feats of aimed fire should be equally possible for composite bow wielders.
whether you allow composite bows is a DMs decision but if allowed adventurers who become aware of it should gravitate towards its use. A smaller bow with the same range and power that is more maneuverable in confined quarters, less likely to disturb foliage and destroy stealth and that functions as well as a longbow in all but the wettest conditions? What’s not to like?
If your able to get hold of Sovereign glue to make your bow then even wet conditions no longer matter 😳😁
pits not traditional, but for practical adventuring it is about as ideal as you can get - maybe that’s why it was left out.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I can see the combining of the bonuses to speed things up instead of having a strength bonus for damage and a dex bonus to hit.
But the way things are going with the game they might as well make it an optional rule.
Since more and more people are using apps for this the calculations are no problem and back in the day I found the calculations were not hard done on paper. You really only did it once and wrote it down.
Though it could be abused to a point for all the other weapons. But only if its allowed to be. Could you imagine if each and every weapon had a to hit bonus and a separate damage bonus? Maybe only allow the separation for ranged weapons.
For archery I could see the strength modified bow as adding range also. Only to the long range distance. +1 dam bonus could give a 10% increase in range +2 bonus would add 20% and so on. But that might be to complex for some.
As for composite bows. Thats pretty much just flavor. The same as a short horse bow, a Japanese long bow or a recurve bow would be. Damage and range would be the same but the look changes.
Yes? AD&D, 3e, and 3.5e all did that. It's only marginally harder than existing calculations. The main problem it introduces is that it's adding multi-attribute-dependency to fighters, while leaving spellcasters with single-attribute-dependency.
There are a number of ways of doing it, but a key requirement would be for every spell to require two rolls, and currently non-damaging spells only require one.
Ranged attack spells would get to add Dex bonus. Simple, its a ranged attack.
This has nothing to do with two rolls. Its only added to a roll that is already happening.
As for a fighters ranged weapons. Like the strength enhanced bows the arrows would have to be specially made to match it. Thrown weapons would be the same, specially made and only usable by those with the required strength.
The fact that we are so far off topic now is proof that the idea of different to hit and damage bonuses is not a workable 5e "thing" . It was much easier in 1e-3.5e as you basically had your rolled stats the whole time. Yes, there were magic items that changed your stats but they were rare and therefore much more valuable. As a homebrew rule - especially for strengths above 20 I can see, As a DM, possibly granting the strength bonus instead of the dex bonus to arrows fired from a specially made bow. As I said above though, the reality generally is that they do the same damage but to potentially more than one foe (if lined up properly) and that sort of thing will probably always be a DM decision not a WOTC rule.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
It's perfectly workable. It just has possibly undesirable side effects.
Wi1dBi11
Your the only one setting up some strawman argument about firing some projectile through two different targets. No one else has even mentioned that is possible.
And why is it not possible to do that now? I could fire an arrow through someones hand or arm and hit the guy behind him right?
I agree, when I first started playing at age 10-11 (around 78) it was very general (hack and slash) and as we got older we looked for more in the game, adding skills to AD&D more social encounters, linked adventures, etc.
But I always try and remember that there are lot of ways to play the game and how I RP'ed at the beginning and down threw the ages.
I also agree with the people who said materials and knowledge play a huge part in making good composite bows, it is not just glue, bone, wood and other good stuff and it is not that all the best components can be found everywhere.
In other games they have metal that is flexible, a fiberglass like material and magically strengthened in the right areas at the right time weapons but that is not really a direction 5e wants to go down or has the bonus range to play with. But you could still try and implement some rules that are more realistic then add some magic into the mix that would add some flavor and RP to the system. For example a Ranger spell that is a ritual that magically enhances the bow and string to do "something". Note it does not really need to enhance to hit bonus but could enhance range, protect from elements, enhance damage (either all the time or a more limited scope), etc.
Your DM can rule that you do - my point is/was that this actually constitutes an extra attack and 5e has no mechanism by RAW to get such attacks from missile (or Melee) combat. You could also potentially run a great sword through 2-3 people or cleave through multiple people with a great axe but there is no general mechanic to allow for such attacks and several special mechanics for it in special circumstances or with special powers. An ultra high strength bow, if allowed, should either grant such extra attacks for driving through foes OR grant extra damage based on the strength needed to pull the bow to full draw. neither has a RAW mechanic although either or both could be homebrewed by a DM. As to it being a straw man look back at one of my earlier posts - I make the point that armor piercing arrows from ultra strong bows have a similar problem to full metal jacket bullets from high velocity rifles - the damage they do to a single target is roughly the same as that done by a lower velocity FMJ slug from something like a pistol, but the high velocity slug is capable of penetrating more than one target if they are lined up properly and the low velocity slug can't. so yes I brought the argument up as I considered it a worthwhile consideration in the discussion, If you disagree you are certaainly free to ignore it.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
which make it not work (well) in 5e - its not impossible to do but its not something that would be likely to go beyond DM homebrew IMNSHO
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Nah, DMs routinely homebrew stuff that's a bigger balance problem than this.
Frankly before we even reach that point it would be nice if muscle-powered projectile weapons scaled their range with the user. As it is, the scaling is so absurdly missing that even if you have reach greater than 5' - e.g. by being a bugbear and attacking on-turn - you get no additional range with your thrown weapons, and no matter how hard you swing your sling, you'll chuck a rock the same distance as anyone else.
I THINK this is because WOTC has all the ranges a bit screwy - the longbow ranges make sense to me if -
the normal range is maximum for accurate aimed fire, the long range is the range for maximum possible aimed fire (with disadvantage) becaue the maximum flight distance for the longbow (and composite bows) is around 1200 feet not 600.
so for military use you could be sending volleys of (unaimed) arrows between 1200 and 600 feet, trying to hit specific targets from 120 to 600 feet and hitting your specific target regularly or even making called shots within 120 feet. this is as much a matter of hand eye coordination as it is strength and so you don't get extra range but you do get the dex bonus and proficiency to hit.
IF we assume (dangerous I know) that the same things are happening with the other missile weapons then perhaps the ranges start to make sense. since adventurers aren't typically loosing voleys of arrows/sling stones/etc but are making single aimed shots.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.