In PF1 it makes me sad that the repeating crossbow only has 5 bolts - always wished it had 6 so was good for 3 rounds of getting off 2 shots or 2 rounds of 3.
Crossbows could be interesting if they target touch armor (on short distance)
TAC is not as bad as in PF1 and one of the big advantages crossbows had was a certain degree of armor penetration - if that would be their new thing they would make a (situational) good alternative to bows
In PF1 it makes me sad that the repeating crossbow only has 5 bolts - always wished it had 6 so was good for 3 rounds of getting off 2 shots or 2 rounds of 3.
It might now be:
3 bolts round 12 bolts round 2, reload on your last action
Return to start.
They should be good for novices, but worse for trained archers.
I would make crossbows a simple weapon with good damage but long reload. That way, an army of peasants with crossbows is great, but trained adventurers would go for bows.
Soooo it's like PF1, where bows are PC weapons, and crossbows are low level NPC weapons?
It's much easier to believe crossbows are still going to suck since the idea of crossbows being comparable to bows while still being realistically accurate and tropeical are mutually exclusive.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to see Crossbows being brought up in line with regular bows. I don't understand Darksol's thinking on how buffing Crossbows up a bit compared to PF 1 will hurt the game, I'm in the camp it'll only improve the game's variety. I've done Legolas, I wanna be able to do Van Helsing, a Darkshard Crossbowman (if anyone knows Warhammer Fantasy), or the Demon Hunter from Diablo.
I would love to see Crossbows being brought up in line with regular bows. I don't understand Darksol's thinking on how buffing Crossbows up a bit compared to PF 1 will hurt the game, I'm in the camp it'll only improve the game's variety. I've done Legolas, I wanna be able to do Van Helsing, a Darkshard Crossbowman (if anyone knows Warhammer Fantasy), or the Demon Hunter from Diablo.
Legolas is better than all 3 of those characters combined simply because he's the OG fantasy character that set the tone for the genre by being the first iconic ranged fantasy character. The others are basically trying to reinvent the wheel and failing horribly, and as such will be unpopular, and therefore unlikely to be supported well in the game.
That's what happened in 3.X, PF1 carried that torch further, and there is nothing to suggest that paradigm has changed for PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to see Crossbows being brought up in line with regular bows. I don't understand Darksol's thinking on how buffing Crossbows up a bit compared to PF 1 will hurt the game, I'm in the camp it'll only improve the game's variety. I've done Legolas, I wanna be able to do Van Helsing, a Darkshard Crossbowman (if anyone knows Warhammer Fantasy), or the Demon Hunter from Diablo.Legolas is better than all 3 of those characters combined simply because he's the OG fantasy character that set the tone for the genre by being the first iconic ranged fantasy character. The others are basically trying to reinvent the wheel and failing horribly, and as such will be unpopular, and therefore unlikely to be supported well in the game.
That's what happened in 3.X, PF1 carried that torch further, and there is nothing to suggest that paradigm has changed for PF2.
I think those three are each in their own way interesting - and I would not exactly call them imitations or something. Of course they are (depending on your taste) more or less cool ranged chars but thats where the similarities end - and I don't think that the crossbow/bow difference is the core
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t exactly get the idea that only Composite Longbows should be a viable ranged weapon because Legolas used one. Like, what if I want to play a character with a ranged weapon who ISN’T Legolas?
I mean, Hawkeye is cool and all, but if my player wants to build Bullseye using Throwing Daggers, then telling my player to just play Legolas instead isn’t going to be fun for the player.
I mean, even Paizo thought that a Dwarf Ranger using a Heavy Crossbow would be a cool idea. It IS a cool idea. But it was just so mechanically underpowered that Pregen Harsk became a meme.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Legolas is better than all 3 of those characters combined simply because he's the OG fantasy character that set the tone for the genre by being the first iconic ranged fantasy character. The others are basically trying to reinvent the wheel and failing horribly, and as such will be unpopular, and therefore unlikely to be supported well in the game.
That's what happened in 3.X, PF1 carried that torch further, and there is nothing to suggest that paradigm has changed for PF2.
...So, your argument basically is Badwrongfun? Beyond the fact that Van Helsing (the original, not the crossbow user) is older than Legolas, and Darkshards aren't a specific character, but a type of unit from the Warhammer Fantasy strategy game... Your argument basically boils down to "Crossbows are bad because Legolas used a bow first and Legolas was OMG AMAZING. No crossbows ever."
Not that arguing will do anything, you seem fairly stuck into your mindset.
How would you like to see crossbows implemented in PF2?
For me I think the way to go to give the crossbow a niche alongside the bow is to make it the single attack, sniper option. For instance, give it a built in aim option that acts like power attack or a bonus to hit [also improving crit chances]. That way crossbow is the 'one hit slugger' vs the bow 'machine gun'.
...Graystone reminded me to actually answer the OP's question. I'd make them have a wider variety, depending on the type of crossbow. Hand Crossbows would be about as fast as bows, but do less damage. In exchange, they'd have bonuses for concealability or a bonus when used in sneak attacks. Light Crossbows would be a bit slower than a bow, but do a bit more damage, or perhaps be a tad more accurate to reflect that crossbows can actually have sights. Heavy Crossbows would be the sniper's weapon of choice, doing heavy damage but having a slow rate of fire.
I would love to see Crossbows being brought up in line with regular bows. I don't understand Darksol's thinking on how buffing Crossbows up a bit compared to PF 1 will hurt the game, I'm in the camp it'll only improve the game's variety. I've done Legolas, I wanna be able to do Van Helsing, a Darkshard Crossbowman (if anyone knows Warhammer Fantasy), or the Demon Hunter from Diablo.Legolas is better than all 3 of those characters combined simply because he's the OG fantasy character that set the tone for the genre by being the first iconic ranged fantasy character. The others are basically trying to reinvent the wheel and failing horribly, and as such will be unpopular, and therefore unlikely to be supported well in the game.
That's what happened in 3.X, PF1 carried that torch further, and there is nothing to suggest that paradigm has changed for PF2.
I think those three are each in their own way interesting - and I would not exactly call them imitations or something. Of course they are (depending on your taste) more or less cool ranged chars but thats where the similarities end - and I don't think that the crossbow/bow difference is the core
That's just the thing though, crossbows and bows weren't really a factor in saying Legolas is better than those characters. It was the way the character was portrayed and being a pioneer of the genre means that it set the original tone of "Crossbows < Bows," simply because the pioneer had a different weapon of choice.
In short, Crossbows (and by relation, thrown weapons) were subject to neglect simply due to popularity circumstances, not technically because Bows were better.
I don’t exactly get the idea that only Composite Longbows should be a viable ranged weapon because Legolas used one. Like, what if I want to play a character with a ranged weapon who ISN’T Legolas?
I mean, Hawkeye is cool and all, but if my player wants to build Bullseye using Throwing Daggers, then telling my player to just play Legolas instead isn’t going to be fun for the player.
I mean, even Paizo thought that a Dwarf Ranger using a Heavy Crossbow would be a cool idea. It IS a cool idea. But it was just so mechanically underpowered that Pregen Harsk became a meme.
I don't get it either. Just like how I don't get why people enjoy Star Wars/Trek so much, or why I don't get why people enjoy Game of Thrones (and not other forms of the fantasy genre prior): Because the Mainstream kills unpopular opinions by effectively drowning them beneath the mounds of popular opinions.
Oh, and P.S., Harsk ditching his crossbow instead of still wielding it supports my theory of crossbows still being worthless, since if crossbows were still good, he'd still be using it as his go-to weapon, since it appears the developers will be better optimizing the Iconics.
...Graystone reminded me to actually answer the OP's question. I'd make them have a wider variety, depending on the type of crossbow. Hand Crossbows would be about as fast as bows, but do less damage. In exchange, they'd have bonuses for concealability or a bonus when used in sneak attacks. Light Crossbows would be a bit slower than a bow, but do a bit more damage, or perhaps be a tad more accurate to reflect that crossbows can actually have sights. Heavy Crossbows would be the sniper's weapon of choice, doing heavy damage but having a slow rate of fire.
I think hand crossbows would be the perfect poisoned weapon [good accuracy/aim + concealability] and sneak attacks/off hand attacks. Light Crossbows? Not sure it needs anything different from heavy.
Could also just be because the iconic ranger styles were archery and dual wielding, not crossbow usage. Devs probably figured having your iconic doing something the class is meant to showcase is a decent idea.
Should've had a different Ranger iconic to do that then.
I really, sincerely, deeply doubt Haste gives an extra action. That massively favors casters by doubling the number of normal spells they can cast in a round, allowing metamagic on the strongest spells (something that is available in limited form as a Cleric capstone), and allowing a chain-casting universalist Wizard to move during their chain of free spells.You're probably right, but I'm still sort of hoping Haste gets simplified down into something similar to a straight +1 action buff. I guess we'll see what they do with it.
Starfinder Haste gives a bonus move action, rather than a bonus attack or general action. I expect the same will be true in PF2, at least at the base level - a bonus action that can only be used for Stride, Stand Up and other such actions. A higher level heightened version may potentially grant an actual unrestricted bonus action, though.
As for crossbows, I'm going to second that I would like them to be the high-accuracy, high-damage option to stand apart from the faster weaker plinking of a regular bow.
And as I've said elsewhere, I would love if ALL weapons, so-called "simple" weapons like the Crossbow included, got better in the hands of someone with higher ranks of proficiency in that weapon group...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How would you like to see crossbows implemented in PF2?
I would love to see Short Bows and Light Crossbows as simple weapons, with long bows and heavy crossbows as martial weapons.
Short bows are one of the simplest weapons ever made by the human being, and even very rudimentary civilizations could use them. In some places of the world, childs use them to fish or hunt with no need to follow the famous English Longbowmen compulsory practice.
I don't know how to make them balanced, but a proper heavy crossbow with a crannequin should do significantly more damage than an arrow, although with a much lower rate of fire.
a 1250lb span weight windlass crossbow can and will go through things a long bow is challenged by, take an age to reload but the impact power is nuts.Composite Bows are the master race of ranged weapons, and it has always been this way since the original 1st Edition D&D. There's no reason to change that paradigm now, especially because there's no new fad to make them less appealing.
In fact, more of the new "cool" characters use bows over crossbows due to their excess training and lack of clunkiness with crossbows. So expecting Crossbows to be comparable, or even have a niche in response to Composite Bows is laughable.
This is abstract fantasy, not articulated science, which means having a 5/8ths ton pull on a crossbow is about as important as having a weapon that's colored purple. Unless that 5/8ths ton pull has a mechanical impact on the game (spoiler alert: it doesn't), it does nothing to make crossbows useful for players.
I really, sincerely, deeply doubt Haste gives an extra action. That massively favors casters by doubling the number of normal spells they can cast in a round, allowing metamagic on the strongest spells (something that is available in limited form as a Cleric capstone), and allowing a chain-casting universalist Wizard to move during their chain of free spells.You're probably right, but I'm still sort of hoping Haste gets simplified down into something similar to a straight +1 action buff. I guess we'll see what they do with it.Starfinder Haste gives a bonus move action, rather than a bonus attack or general action. I expect the same will be true in PF2, at least at the base level - a bonus action that can only be used for Stride, Stand Up and other such actions. A higher level heightened version may potentially grant an actual unrestricted bonus action, though.
As for crossbows, I'm going to second that I would like them to be the high-accuracy, high-damage option to stand apart from the faster weaker plinking of a regular bow.
And as I've said elsewhere, I would love if ALL weapons, so-called "simple" weapons like the Crossbow included, got better in the hands of someone with higher ranks of proficiency in that weapon group...
I believe that it was mentioned somewhere that “Slowed 1” is a condition that reduces the number of actions a creature can perform by 1 (might have been when they were talking about Zombies?). It makes sense that Slow would inflict the Slowed 1 condition, and that Haste would grant the Hasted 1 Condition. It could even go Slowed 2 -> Slowed 1 -> Normal -> Hasted 1 -> Hasted 2.
Casters do get more powerful when Hasted, but I doubt anyone would complain that the Wizard is casting more party-wide buffs. And who’s to say that the improved action economy of the Cleric capstone wouldn’t work with the Hastened 1 Condition. Casting a 3 action Reach Scorching Ray Spell plus another 2 action Heal Spell with a free Empowered Metamagic sounds like what I’d expect from a 20th Level Hastened 2 Cleric.
Except you were using 'excessive training' as an example (besides wrist bows are firmly embedded as cool) and we have crossbows being awesome in the Walking Dead (for instance) so..This is abstract fantasy, not articulated science, which means having a 5/8ths ton pull on a crossbow is about as important as having a weapon that's colored purple. Unless that 5/8ths ton pull has a mechanical impact on the game (spoiler alert: it doesn't), it does nothing to make crossbows useful for players.a 1250lb span weight windlass crossbow can and will go through things a long bow is challenged by, take an age to reload but the impact power is nuts.Composite Bows are the master race of ranged weapons, and it has always been this way since the original 1st Edition D&D. There's no reason to change that paradigm now, especially because there's no new fad to make them less appealing.
In fact, more of the new "cool" characters use bows over crossbows due to their excess training and lack of clunkiness with crossbows. So expecting Crossbows to be comparable, or even have a niche in response to Composite Bows is laughable.
"Excessive training" is quantified by levels and BAB and other game mechanics. There are no game mechanics tied to the weight of pull to a crossbow, which makes any mention of such irrelevant and unimportant, because it means nothing in the game.
Hand Crossbows are the absolute worst in PF1, and I won't see that changing anytime soon in PF2. "1D4 damage with clunky reloading and stupid exotic proficiency requirement 2.0" would be a better name for it.
Walking Dead isn't really applicable to how a crossbow shot would work in Pathfinder. Whether you have a Gunslinger or a Bolt Ace in Pathfinder doesn't aid or change one's ability to be detectable after firing from standbys. The first season where Crossbows were in use would have resulted in them all dying if we used PF rules, so no.
I am okay with the notion that crossbows will still be bad in PF2.
Historically a lot of the appeal of crossbows is that they are easy to use, require little training, practice, or physical gifts. Player characters, on the other hand tend to have training, practice, and physical gifts coming out their ears. If one type of weapon is just better if you have all the training, practice and advantages that is the one PCs should use.
If we want to make crossbows cool and good, I am fine with completely deviating from realism so long as the fully automatic repeating crossbow with under-barrel mine launcher and grappling hook types of crossbows are exceedingly rare.
They should be basic weapons with good damage but downside is reload time. It is a weapon anybody an use with minimal training to figure out here is how you cock it and then point the arrow at desired target. I would guess it is probably two actions to reload and one to fire so if you are stationary you can fire once a turn.
They should define the reloading as a action of the actual weapon, and include a "loaded" property for actions that need to be loaded. Just don't include the loaded property on the hand crossbow to represent it being able to be loaded and fired in a single action, as such:
Hand Crossbow
description of a hand crossbow
[[A]] Ranged Attack (deadly 1d4) Damage 1d6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Light Crossbow
description of a light crossbow
[[A]] Ranged Attack (loaded, deadly 1d8) Damage 1d8
[[A]] Load Load 1 bolt into the crossbow
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Heavy Crossbow
description of a heavy crossbow
[[A]] Ranged Attack (loaded, deadly 1d10) Damage 1d10
[[A]][[A]] Load Load 1 bolt into the crossbow
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Repeating Crossbow
[description of a heavy crossbow[/i]
[[A]] Ranged Attack (loaded, deadly 1d8, capacity 6) Damage 1d8
[[A]][[A]] Load Load cartridge of 6 bolts into the crossbow
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think most of us can agree that that is a ... not so convincing argument
and I want crossbows at least somewhat decent and at some point play a pf2.0 bolt ace
quit changing your argument, if your argument is (as originally stated) crossbows suck because bows are cool, you cannot, when provided with examples of crossbows in pop culture, change the argument to xbows sucking in PF1, so the pop culture xbow would not work, one or the other, please choose.
Because only one argument, or even aspect of an argument, can ever be valid? PF1 Bows were both fashionable and the most powerful martial weaponry in the game; I have never changed my stance on this matter, which means I never changed my argument whatsoever. All you did was attack one aspect of my argument at any given time, and even then you opened up holes in your argument that wouldn't hold water if I applied their concepts to PF1 (or PF2 for that matter).
The whole "crossbows were cool and useful" in Walking Dead would be a major misnomer in Pathfinder simply because of Stealth rules and Perception mechanics. The big draw to crossbows in Walking Dead versus simple firearms was the ability to defeat walkers without drawing attention. Can't do that in Pathfinder, and most certainly not with a ranged weapon attack; at least, without some form of outside help (like a Silence spell, with maybe an illusion).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Starfinder Haste gives a bonus move action, rather than a bonus attack or general action. I expect the same will be true in PF2, at least at the base level - a bonus action that can only be used for Stride, Stand Up and other such actions. A higher level heightened version may potentially grant an actual unrestricted bonus action, though.
Ugh. I hope haste doesn't get nerfed that badly. An extra action would be nice. But I suspect you're right. I'm getting the impression that they don't want anyone to ever have more than three actions. Which is sad.
Being able to speed up crossbow loading sounds like a perfect use for haste in the new action economy.
I ran a short 5E campaign based on a video game IP (Endless Legend). Since this was some of the art, I made it part of the rules. A feat took out all the penalties for crossbows, and let them be used with a shield. Gave them a different feel from bows.
Now, that's 5E, where a feat has to do a lot, but pushing crossbows into a different ranged style altogether would be more interesting than just making them "bows, but different!"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've heard a lot of people saying that it'd be cool if crossbows got less attacks then bows but more damage per attack, so I'd like to throw my vote out there too, I think that's a stellar idea.
Slightly off-topic, but keeping with the less attacks more oomph per attack train of thought, I hope in PF2 there's a feat like bull's eye shot but actually good. It's a standard fantasy trope to have archers or crossbowmen of nigh paranormal accuracy, like Robin Hood or William Tell. But in PF1 it's really hard to emulate these characters, archers are instead encouraged to get as many arrows into the air as possible, even if individual attacks are less accurate.
I'd like to see more support for a sniper style of play, for crossbows and bows.
I too like the idea of crossbows being the sniper's weapon of choice for the one big shot vs lots of arrows dichotomy. But I feel like I should point out that I'm pretty sure we haven't actually seen a ranged weapon in use yet. The closest we have come is the javelin in the Ogre stat block. We know throwing it is an action, but is drawing it?
Is knocking an arrow still going to be a free action? We don't for sure know that either. I believe it was said Longbows have deadly, meaning they will be pretty potent for crits. And I think the Double Shot fighter feat said you can shoot two enemies with one action, not one enemy twice. We might be seeing bows themselves becoming less about blotting out the sun with your volley of arrows and more about lining up the perfect headshot. Who knows!
|
Is knocking an arrow still going to be a free action? We don't for sure know that either. I believe it was said Longbows have deadly, meaning they will be pretty potent for crits. And I think the Double Shot fighter feat said you can shoot two enemies with one action, not one enemy twice. We might be seeing bows themselves becoming less about blotting out the sun with your volley of arrows and more about lining up the perfect headshot. Who knows!
The Glass Cannon podcast involved both a crossbow and a sling. The sling seemed not to require an action to reload, while the crossbow did.
There could've been an inaccuracy there (especially in regards to the sling), but it clearly indicates that both options (requiring actions to reload, and not requiring such actions) seem to exist within the rules.
Is knocking an arrow still going to be a free action? We don't for sure know that either. I believe it was said Longbows have deadly, meaning they will be pretty potent for crits. And I think the Double Shot fighter feat said you can shoot two enemies with one action, not one enemy twice. We might be seeing bows themselves becoming less about blotting out the sun with your volley of arrows and more about lining up the perfect headshot. Who knows!The Glass Cannon podcast involved both a crossbow and a sling. The sling seemed not to require an action to reload, while the crossbow did.
There could've been an inaccuracy there (especially in regards to the sling), but it clearly indicates that both options (requiring actions to reload, and not requiring such actions) seem to exist within the rules.
Oh, huh, I would have thought I'd catch that. When were they used?
Starfinder Haste gives a bonus move action, rather than a bonus attack or general action. I expect the same will be true in PF2, at least at the base level - a bonus action that can only be used for Stride, Stand Up and other such actions. A higher level heightened version may potentially grant an actual unrestricted bonus action, though.Ugh. I hope haste doesn't get nerfed that badly. An extra action would be nice. But I suspect you're right. I'm getting the impression that they don't want anyone to ever have more than three actions. Which is sad.
Being able to speed up crossbow loading sounds like a perfect use for haste in the new action economy.
In the old D&D rules, Haste did give an extra attack (and it was a BIG deal since you usually only had one per round), but could not be used to cast a second spell. The reasoning was that you can't just talk and gesiculate faster to cast, it just won't work.
|
|
Cool, so no cost for drawing arrows, darts, stones for slings, but costs an action to load a crossbow (or blowgun).
This seems very likely, yes.
I wouldn't be entirely surprised to find that this list is slightly off in some way, but there's definitely free-to-load weapons and those that take an action. Any errors in the above list would be which category a specific weapon is in.
If firearms still act as a touch attack at close range then heavy crossbows should as well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Crossbows could potentially get a weapon trait combining the Aim and Boost weapon traits from Starfinder. If you take an action to aim before firing, double the range increment and add a die to the damage of the bolt. That would give them a good flavor space separate from regular bows, especially if they start with higher range and damage to begin with as they should.
Also seconding and expanding on an idea seen earlier: shortbow and light crossbow should be simple weapons. Longbow and heavy crossbow should be martial weapons. If composite bow is still better than a regular bow it should be an exotic weapon, and can live there with the wrist crossbow that leaves your hand free and is aimed and fired totally different from any other ranged weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Excessive training" is quantified by levels and BAB and other game mechanics. There are no game mechanics tied to the weight of pull to a crossbow, which makes any mention of such irrelevant and unimportant, because it means nothing in the game.Except you were using 'excessive training' as an example (besides wrist bows are firmly embedded as cool) and we have crossbows being awesome in the Walking Dead (for instance) so..This is abstract fantasy, not articulated science, which means having a 5/8ths ton pull on a crossbow is about as important as having a weapon that's colored purple. Unless that 5/8ths ton pull has a mechanical impact on the game (spoiler alert: it doesn't), it does nothing to make crossbows useful for players.a 1250lb span weight windlass crossbow can and will go through things a long bow is challenged by, take an age to reload but the impact power is nuts.Composite Bows are the master race of ranged weapons, and it has always been this way since the original 1st Edition D&D. There's no reason to change that paradigm now, especially because there's no new fad to make them less appealing.
In fact, more of the new "cool" characters use bows over crossbows due to their excess training and lack of clunkiness with crossbows. So expecting Crossbows to be comparable, or even have a niche in response to Composite Bows is laughable.
Except there is a game mechanic tied to the the pull weight of a crossbow... or at least the force said pull weight can put on the arrow. It's called Damage Dice (and also Range for that matter). Even in PF1e a crossbow had a larger damage die and range than the equivalent (non-composite in the case of range) bow. The problem is that it wasn't exactly a large difference, only one damage step and 10 feet, and having a composite +1 bow rendered both irrelevant as it caught up on both, while also retaining the free reload and unique bow feats. What many people in this thread (I'll be including myself, I'd love the "one strong hit" crossbow style to be a thing) want is to simply take that precedent and amplify it, give the crossbow a meaningful improvement in damage to make up for the slower loading speed.
Maybe crossbow should get a 'pierce' crit ability (like cleave in a line)
and I like the notion that one can use crossbows with a shield, that opens up some possibilities - I might houserule that
Historically shields and crossbows have been used, though that was more a Pavise for cover and an aiming platform than actually holding the crossbow with one hand.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
There should be an attempt at parity between crossbows and normal bows. There should be an ATTEMPT at parity between most weapons. Weapons as a flavor and style choice > weapons chosen because of mechanical advantage IMO on game design.