| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Weapon tiers have nothing to do with the culture they come from. Exotic doesn't mean they're rare (whips are a good example of a common "exotic" weapon). The tiers of weapons, exotic, martial, simple, represent the amount of training needed to master its use. Clubs are simple because its easy to learn how to effectively whack someone with a stick. Whips are exotic because they are difficult to handle require a lot of practice to use.
Except when it is not... A lot of weapons in the "exotic" catagory are that way because they are asian and therefore "exotic"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So all of fantasy is cliche mideval English/French fantasy... gotcha...Nine times out of 10 exotic weapons aren't worth the feat. And that's being generous.I like most weapons. Yet have to agree. I don't mind say if I can do combat manuevers with a exotic weapon as it makes sense and requires training. Too often it fees like the devs want to punish someone for taking a exotic weapon.It's not that they want to punish someone, but they don't want to make the exotic weapon so good that it drops the iconic martial weapons out of the running.
When you think of fantasy heroes, be they Prince Charming, Roland, Aragorn, or Fafhrd, you don't generally think of them using a "rhoka" or a "dorn dergar" (whatever the hell those are). You don't think of Robin Hood or William Tell as using a sling staff or a repeating heavy crossbow.
And you certainly don't visit the Royal Armouries in Leeds to look at their extensive collection of mancatchers and bolas.
No, only about 90-95% of it, assuming by "English" you mean "Celtic," which is probably the single biggest influence after Tolkien. The demonstration is left as an exercise for the local video store or library bookshelf.
Lets ignore the fac that the Mideast, India, China, Japan, and the Native American's viewed Europen Weapons as "Exotic" and had their own weapons and their own fantasies...And yet, every culture that could work metal developed something that looked like the iconic martial weapons of sword, bow, and spear. Even the cultures that couldn't work metal (native Americans) got as close as they could, using spears and bows but not swords.
There's a reason that the iconic weapons are iconic. They tend to work better than the bizarre gladiator weapons like the net and trident of the retarius (retarii?). That, in turn, is why the the legions were equipped with javelins and swords instead of...
1) No, that is 90% of YOUR fantasy. Ever heard of Gilgamesh? Or Arabian Nights? Or any of the countless Shinto local legends. Or legendary Samurai like Musashi. Your fantasy is derived from classical European lore of the Mideval Age and of Celtic lore, which is only a very tiny portion of the whole world of fantasy available.
2) Except the "iconic" weapons of the Longsword, the Longbow, and the Spear are predominately modeled after European weapons. The Longsword (i.e. the "iconic" weapon of iconic weapons) is PURELY European. The Chinese straight sword is significantly different (Thinner and lighter for speed, more flexible, and a smaller handguard and smaller hilt) and the Katana is completely different from them. The swords of the greeks were much differnt as well. Spears are common in history due to their ease to develop, but even those are different between cultures. The Speak presented in the CRB is modeled after the European spear and javalin. The Chinese spear is actually shorter, more flexible (made from bamboo vs solid woods like oak), and usually created more like a double weapon (fighters were taught that both ends of the weapon hurts like hell) with a heavy pommel in the rear to work as a counterweight and a bludgeoning weapon. The longbow presented in the CRB is the English Longbow, which again, is very differnt from things like the Japanese Yumi.
Traditional Chinese straight swords, or jian or gim, are comparable in weight and flexibility to other European one-handed swords, which the game refers to as a longsword. The nonsense wu shu versions are lighter and OVERLY flexible in order to create an effect that some people might find impressive when viewing a performance. These blades would never be able to give an effective thrust.
Chinese spears, or qiang, predominantly use a hardwood (usually white wax wood) for the shaft, not bamboo. They can also get up to lengths of 21 feet.
Good point about the weight of the scabbard and baldric, Lincoln Hill. Although I would still estimate the weight of a scabbard to be less than 2-3 lbs. that make up the weight difference.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the exact sort of thing that Kirthfinder does.I like that idea as well, although it should of course probably apply to martial weapons; a sword (exotic) might also be usable to do bludgeoning damage via a pommel strike.Slightly related notion - I always thought it would be intriguing if most 'simple' weapons had an 'upgrade' that only kicked in if you had them as martial (or exotic) proficiencies as well; things like:
Dagger (simple): The dagger is melee only.
Dagger (martial): The dagger is throwable.
Dagger (exotic): The dagger provides +2 to Feint checks.Staff (simple): The staff is treated as a two-handed weapon.
Staff (martial): The staff may instead be treated as a double weapon.
Staff (exotic): The staff gains the 'trip' quality and may be thrown like a spear (10' increment).
The Basic D&D Cyclopedia did this very well.
Except that a sling is fairly common among peasants due to its cost, while a crossbow is an expensive piece of equipment that fires an expensive piece of ammunition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except that a sling is fairly common among peasants due to its cost, while a crossbow is an expensive piece of equipment that fires an expensive piece of ammunition.
Actually, historically the Crossbow was actually common BECAUSE it was cheap to make, bolts are comparatively cheap, and it took no time to train peasants to use...
Slings are actually fairly uncommon outside of toys because they were too difficult to use to really hurt someone. Most peasants tended to just use their farm tools for self defense over anything
The training in its use is definitely true, but ancient armies employed slingers in warfare to great effect. They didn't have to contend with plate armor at that time, but slings were still considered to be effective weapons. While it's true that it takes more skill to be accurate with a sling than it does with a bow or crossbow, accuracy is not the goal in mass warfare. You fill the air with as many projectiles as you can and hope for the best.
Crafting sling stones can be as complicated as pouring molten lead into a form or as simple as partially drying hand-formed bullets of sandy clay. When you compare the amount of effort and materials that goes into making a single bolt, it is effectively a more expensive piece of ammunition. Then consider the construction of a sling to a crossbow, there's no debating which is more expensive to create and maintain.
The crossbow IS a much more effective weapon, but that doesn't mean that a sling is an ineffective weapon.
Part of the problem with weapons in D&D is that they draw from multiple cultural backgrounds and time periods. Slings died out during the middle ages because they lost the arms race with the armor of the time. When you place the weapons of the past next to more modern weaponry, you end up debating weapons that occupied the same role in different time periods.
Slings are actually fairly uncommon outside of toys because they were too difficult to use to really hurt someone. Most peasants tended to just use their farm tools for self defense over anything
Slings HURT. The problem with them is you need 1a lot of space around you, which is sometimes hard to get in the middle of a battle.
Yeah, well, most weapons PCs use aren't actually designed to be wielded by a single individual.
In a dungeon.
But whatever, we got dire flails to make up for that.
|
One weapon I'd like to add to the discussion is the rope dart. A range of 20 feet, and you can flurry with it. Sure the damage dice isn't much, and it's a ranged weapon that doesn't work for Zen Archers, so it gets overlooked, but with it you can Flurry of Blows and hit any enemy within a 45' wide circle. Tell me that isn't worth something!
I kind of want to combine it with the Sacred Mountain archetype, which gives you bonuses if you don't move during your turn.
Except that a sling is fairly common among peasants due to its cost, while a crossbow is an expensive piece of equipment that fires an expensive piece of ammunition.
Used primarily outside of battle by beekeepers..... What? How would you fight a bear?
Anyway, with all this discussion of multiculturalism- Pathfinder as a whole seems somewhat good at keeping a wide perspective (Ultimate Combat did do a lot to add some more distinctive martial weapons when they couldn't just be chalked up to the exisitng weapons tables). This is more of a problem with grandfathered weapons tables from D&D.
And that is based rather heavily on somewhat limited sources (how we forget an age before the internet) and popculture depictions. I am still annoyed how longswords can only do slashing, and not the piercing damage they were often used for, due to Errol Flynning being so popular in movies. Back then, and real move towards historical accuracy would have met...with the same kind of arguments we have here about how they are 'unrealistic'.
As someone who is generally conservative with rules, I am fairly happy with the majority of how this works. It could use some tweaks and simplification though. The idea that the long sword could also represent other somewhat similar is rather appealing. I personally never quite got why katana are a separate entry from scimitars in that kind of light. "They are basically longswords...but better....because Japan?". Just having a general 'one handed curved sword' entry would probably suffice. And we all know old joke about the number of polearms...
The training in its use is definitely true, but ancient armies employed slingers in warfare to great effect. They didn't have to contend with plate armor at that time, but slings were still considered to be effective weapons. While it's true that it takes more skill to be accurate with a sling than it does with a bow or crossbow, accuracy is not the goal in mass warfare. You fill the air with as many projectiles as you can and hope for the best.
Crafting sling stones can be as complicated as pouring molten lead into a form or as simple as partially drying hand-formed bullets of sandy clay. When you compare the amount of effort and materials that goes into making a single bolt, it is effectively a more expensive piece of ammunition. Then consider the construction of a sling to a crossbow, there's no debating which is more expensive to create and maintain.
The crossbow IS a much more effective weapon, but that doesn't mean that a sling is an ineffective weapon.
Part of the problem with weapons in D&D is that they draw from multiple cultural backgrounds and time periods. Slings died out during the middle ages because they lost the arms race with the armor of the time. When you place the weapons of the past next to more modern weaponry, you end up debating weapons that occupied the same role in different time periods.
idk, because the time slings were popularly used tended to be before the crossbow was really a thing. In a lot of instances where the Crossbow existed, it readily become the common weapn to give to peasant soldiers. Examples being the old Chinese armies and the French in the hundred years war (the english were more partial to the longbow).
Slings are actually fairly uncommon outside of toys because they were too difficult to use to really hurt someone. Most peasants tended to just use their farm tools for self defense over anythingSlings HURT. The problem with them is you need 1a lot of space around you, which is sometimes hard to get in the middle of a battle.
Well sure, they hurt. But they are not quite DEADLY. They can maybe be deadly... if the guy was pretty much naked. But any sort of armor, whether it be leather helmets or padded fur or plate, pretty much negates the sling by all but the most trained professionals (the guys who can hit your eye from 20 yards away or whatever).
One weapon I'd like to add to the discussion is the rope dart. A range of 20 feet, and you can flurry with it. Sure the damage dice isn't much, and it's a ranged weapon that doesn't work for Zen Archers, so it gets overlooked, but with it you can Flurry of Blows and hit any enemy within a 45' wide circle. Tell me that isn't worth something!
I kind of want to combine it with the Sacred Mountain archetype, which gives you bonuses if you don't move during your turn.
Fun thing also is that you can apply feats like:
Point-Blank Shot (you are always going to within 30 ft due to the whole rope thing so pretty muhc a +1 hit/Damage)
CHarging Hurler
Rapid Shot
Snap Shot
|
|
One weapon I'd like to add to the discussion is the rope dart. A range of 20 feet, and you can flurry with it. Sure the damage dice isn't much, and it's a ranged weapon that doesn't work for Zen Archers, so it gets overlooked, but with it you can Flurry of Blows and hit any enemy within a 45' wide circle. Tell me that isn't worth something!
I kind of want to combine it with the Sacred Mountain archetype, which gives you bonuses if you don't move during your turn.
Fun thing also is that you can apply feats like:
Point-Blank Shot (you are always going to within 30 ft due to the whole rope thing so pretty muhc a +1 hit/Damage)
CHarging Hurler
Rapid Shot
Snap Shot
You don't even need Snap Shot. You're a monk, remember? Totally agree with Point-Blank, though, and Rapid Shot plus Flurry plus spend a ki point for an extra attack can get pretty nuts.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well sure, they hurt. But they are not quite DEADLY. They can maybe be deadly... if the guy was pretty much naked. But any sort of armor, whether it be leather helmets or padded fur or plate, pretty much negates the sling by all but the most trained professionals (the guys who can hit your eye from 20 yards away or whatever).
Actually slings tended to be feared because they could be deadly. At least, if you are using the right ammunition.
Lead sling bullets were made and used for the same reason why lead is used in gun bullets- it is dense (and cheap, but that doesn't matter too much here), and the way it expands on impact allows it to impart a lot of its force effectively. And this is talking about kinetic impact here.
Armors are rather effective against preventing blades from focusing their impact to a single point (edge, point, other more technical terms for the cutty-stabby bits). It allows them to turn blows for sharpened metal sticks into blows from less sharpened metal sticks. But that doesn't stop heavy impacts from jumbling up your innards. It was not until the development of advanced iron armor on a wide scale in the High Middle Ages that the sling began to drop in effective damage. Prior to that, even if there was sufficient knowledge to produce such armor, it was an effective non-issue due to the fact that most soldiers could not afford it.
Slings were also deadly because, unlike a barrage from bows, they were hard to spot. They were small, palm to fist sized stones or lead bullets, versus the long shafts of arrows. So they were hard to notice and raise your shields against. That, combined with the fact that they caused a heavy blow, rather than the gushing bloody wound one might see from a bow, meant that the confusion of combat could leave you under attack with little idea of what is happening or where it is coming from. So at that point, taking advantage of how cheap they are to make, it is rather easy to take advantage of numbers and use volley formations that could barrage the tight infantry formations of the day. Against light to no armor, it was fairly much on par with the bow in effectiveness.
It is for all these reasons that slings continued to stay in use until around the 16th century. But I'll admit, the sling was somewhat marginalized due to the high level of skill required to use it without accidentally sending it backwards at your own men. Besides the aforementioned advantages, it persisted due to its easy construction. Crossbows, in comparison required a lot of technical skill to make, but it was easy to load and shoot (perfect for untrained serfs who had become increasingly urbanized and unfamiliar with ranged weapons). But in the end, slings only lost their place when firearms (another lead shooting weapon) overtook their role on the battlefield.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not. It really is not. They're weak without a class feature, eat up too much money, and can explode. You would be better off just getting a longbow.
My black powder cleric with mending disagrees ;)
Yes it would be, as archers were described as elite ranged warriors who trained in longbows whereas crossbows were relegated to barely trained conscripts. That's why crossbows are simple weapons as opposed to martial.The Heavy Crossbow is the worst. The worst ever.If you're playing an archer, it's bad.
That mostly comes from the fact that bows (powerful ones meant for combat against armored foes at least) typically needed a large amount of strength to operate, and as such needed years of training to use.
Crossbows were of course simpler to use. Even for ones without cranks, they would usually have a bar to put under your foot while you drew back with your arms, making it a full body motion with more leverage compared to just using your arms. Also, of course, you had the advantage of being able to hold your fire without basically killing your arms.
But a lot of the crossbow's reputation likely comes from the fact that the average user was just a random person dragged in from the farms or streets. That does not necessarily mean that they were bad weapons, but that there were few that truly stood out in their use. I mean, the same could often be said of spear wielders. Swords are more famous, but the sheer advantage of the spear's reach made it generally more powerful. But again, it was often used by recruits that were only trained in formations, and as such he would get his rear kicked 1 on 1.
Of course, the way the game's heavy crossbows work...yeah, they suck. Way too many feats to get them going.Light crossbows are alright after you grab rapid reload though.
I was watching an ancient weapons specialist on the History Channel and he was showing the difference between the straight sword and Kopesh used by the Egyptians. By his description, the Kopesh should have a piercing quality too.
He demonstrated it to slash like a Scimitar, hook and pull down a shield and to thrust forward with the sharp point.
I always thought it was an ungainly weapon. I always liked the Katana if for nothing else because I liked the japanese movies.
In the days before Feats it was the Longsword and you just added on magic to make the weapon do more damage.
The Spiked Chain actually isn't bad if you get it for free (and any Half Orc with Martial Weapon Proficiencies can do so if they like). It's not worth spending a Feat on, but neither are many Exotic Weapons when you get right down to it.
A lot of people back at CRB release said that Martial weapons were the same if not better than the spiked chain :-/
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Spiked Chain actually isn't bad if you get it for free (and any Half Orc with Martial Weapon Proficiencies can do so if they like). It's not worth spending a Feat on, but neither are many Exotic Weapons when you get right down to it.A lot of people back at CRB release said that Martial weapons were the same if not better than the spiked chain :-/
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not that they want to punish someone, but they don't want to make the exotic weapon so good that it drops the iconic martial weapons out of the running.When you think of fantasy heroes, be they Prince Charming, Roland, Aragorn, or Fafhrd, you don't generally think of them using a "rhoka" or a "dorn dergar" (whatever the hell those are). You don't think of Robin Hood or William Tell as using a sling staff or a repeating heavy crossbow.
And you certainly don't visit the Royal Armouries in Leeds to look at their extensive collection of mancatchers and bolas.
I get your point OG. I even see it with some weapons. Yet more often than not it just seems like a dev went "nuh too good of a weapon better make it exotic" imo. A good example a exotic weapon is the monofilament whip from shadowrun. A weapon that does decent damage. Yet woe to the person who rolled low to hit using it. It had a chance to arc back and strike the wielder. Usually with fatal results.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well sure, they hurt. But they are not quite DEADLY. They can maybe be deadly... if the guy was pretty much naked. But any sort of armor, whether it be leather helmets or padded fur or plate, pretty much negates the sling by all but the most trained professionals (the guys who can hit your eye from 20 yards away or whatever).
Soldiers, notwithstanding their defensive armour, are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood. It is universally known the ancients employed slingers in all their engagements. There is the greater reason for instructing all troops, without exception, in this exercise, as the sling cannot be reckoned any encumbrance, and often is of the greatest service, especially when they are obliged to engage in stony places, to defend a mountain or an eminence, or to repulse an enemy at the attack of a castle or city Vegetius, in his work De Re Militari
It doesn't matter whether the guy is dead dead or just thinks his mom is trying to wake him up for school: he's out of the fight.
I don't think the ancients would have gone through all that trouble to make lead sling bullets if they weren't somewhat effective.
Slightly related notion - I always thought it would be intriguing if most 'simple' weapons had an 'upgrade' that only kicked in if you had them as martial (or exotic) proficiencies as well; things like:
Dagger (simple): The dagger is melee only.
Dagger (martial): The dagger is throwable.
Dagger (exotic): The dagger provides +2 to Feint checks.Staff (simple): The staff is treated as a two-handed weapon.
Staff (martial): The staff may instead be treated as a double weapon.
Staff (exotic): The staff gains the 'trip' quality and may be thrown like a spear (10' increment).
We have a house rule like this.
Spears are kinda awesome with the upped proficiencies.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
On Slings;
I have an uncle who runs a very high end Hunting Buisness, taking rich corporate types out for group events doing "unusual" hunts. When he hunts by himself he never uses a gun or a weapon be hasn't made with his own hands, it isn't sporting. He prefers the Javelin and atlatl for things like Turkey hunting or White tail. He is however, devastating with a sling. On open ground, like The plains in the Northwest Territories he can hit a kill shot at over 100 yards on a full grown Elk. I've seen this with my own eyes twice.
Slings don't just Hurt, they are Lethal. And unlike an arrow which takes time to kill, unless it hits the heart or brain, slings can drop quarry immediately. As a hunting implement it is top of the line.
It is very hard to use, I've tried and literally missed the broadside of a barn at 50 feet. But it is so simple to make that I can pull it off with almost no practice.
It's simple in the rules because poor people made due and this weapon worked well.
Slings were mainly used in ancient times. I bet armor was inconsistent at best during those times. Crossbow is much later and could go through most armor. Not even in the same time period really, and hardly a fair comparison.
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.
The spiked chain is the only two-handed finessible disarm/trip weapon around. That's gotta' count for something.
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.The spiked chain is the only two-handed finessible disarm/trip weapon around. That's gotta' count for something.
Heavy Flails is two handed disarm and trip.
The only benefit of Spiked Chain is finesse-ible. Is finesse worth an extra feat?
And, heavy flails have a better crit range than the spiked chain, and +0.5 average damage at M and +1 average damage at S.
The most common stuff I see:
Composite Longbow - this is basically the only ranged weapon that is plan A, any others are plan B at best.
Nodachi/Greatsword/Falchion/Elven Curve Blade/Oversized Falcata - Big swords are cool and do lots of damage.
Scimitar - Dervish Dance.
Longspear/Bardiche/Glaive/Lance - Reach is really useful.
Kukri/Wakazashi/Revolver - This is how to two weapon fight.
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.The spiked chain is the only two-handed finessible disarm/trip weapon around. That's gotta' count for something.Heavy Flails is two handed disarm and trip.
The only benefit of Spiked Chain is finesse-ible. Is finesse worth an extra feat?
Maybe, but is it worth 2 though (Weapon Finesse and Exotic Weapon Proficiency), and I think the answer is probably no, especially for a weapon that does inferior base damage and has a worse crit. Combined with the fact that combat maneuvers are strength based, well finesse just isn't that great of a property.
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.The spiked chain is the only two-handed finessible disarm/trip weapon around. That's gotta' count for something.
I can't believe you have forgotten the Elven Curve Blade.
Glaive guisarm! Its a glave. With brace (a highly underated quality imo)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
..I can't believe you have forgotten the Elven Curve Blade.(whining) Elven saber!
It turns out that the Taldane word, "saber," comes from the elvish words "sheii beurr," which, when literally translated, means "curve blade."
|
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.The Spiked Chain actually isn't bad if you get it for free (and any Half Orc with Martial Weapon Proficiencies can do so if they like). It's not worth spending a Feat on, but neither are many Exotic Weapons when you get right down to it.A lot of people back at CRB release said that Martial weapons were the same if not better than the spiked chain :-/
Hell a scythe is better than the current spiked chain. Same damage, keeps the trip quality, gives you piercing and slashing, and gives you a x4 crit
|
|
Yeah, heavy flail is better than the spiked chain in PF.The spiked chain is the only two-handed finessible disarm/trip weapon around. That's gotta' count for something.
Not really. Those combat maneuvers are still reliant on str instead of dex so you either still need an okay str to make those reliable or invest another feat (agile maneuvers) to let you use your dex on them. A minor aside the fact that we have to take 2 feats to be both agile with weapons and combat maneuvers is annoying as all hell.
|
|
Not really. Those combat maneuvers are still reliant on str instead of dex so you either still need an okay str to make those reliable or invest another feat (agile maneuvers) to let you use your dex on them. A minor aside the fact that we have to take 2 feats to be both agile with weapons and combat maneuvers is annoying as all hell.
No, they aren't. They're two of only three combat maneuvers you can use Weapon Finesse on, but you can in fact use it on them.
I can't believe you have forgotten the Elven Curve Blade.
I didn't forget it. I excluded it. It is neither a disarm nor a trip weapon.
Not really. Those combat maneuvers are still reliant on str instead of dex so you either still need an okay str to make those reliable or invest another feat (agile maneuvers) to let you use your dex on them. A minor aside the fact that we have to take 2 feats to be both agile with weapons and combat maneuvers is annoying as all hell.The spiked chain is the only two-handed finessible disarm/trip weapon around. That's gotta' count for something.
If you have Weapon Finesse, you can use Dexterity when disarming, sundering, and tripping if you attempt the maneuver with a finnessable weapon.
|
|
Not really. Those combat maneuvers are still reliant on str instead of dex so you either still need an okay str to make those reliable or invest another feat (agile maneuvers) to let you use your dex on them. A minor aside the fact that we have to take 2 feats to be both agile with weapons and combat maneuvers is annoying as all hell.No, they aren't. They're two of only three combat maneuvers you can use Weapon Finesse on, but you can in fact use it on them.
Cool! Learn something new everyday. I will say though I'm having a hard time picturing a finessed sunder. Also wish it would cover things like steal as well.
But all of that is a topic for another thread. Back to weapon talk!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I'm a fan of the Ripsaw Glaive, cause really, who doesn't love a chainsaw on a pole!?
The greatest irony? Siege crossbows IRL were STAGGERINGLY powerful, to the point that they were better than firearms for penetration and damage with the right bolt head (Bodkin points ftw!). The catch was that it took minutes to reload the damn things, but still...
And before you say 'that's useless outside of a siege!', remember that there's nothing stopping you from opening with your obscenely powerful crossbow then switching out to something practical for a prolonged fight, then reloading between encounters.
That's how I use my heavy crossbow. Mounted paladin build with improved vital strike. Opening with 3d10 and a smite ain't bad. Then I drop it and grab my other stuff. Actually, it's large sized, because a well advanced full BAB character can usually handle the minus to hit.