|
I'm making a sniper-type character for Second Darkness (mixing a bit of Scout, Fighter, Ranger, Deepwood Sniper and Order of the Bow Initiate) and while my instinct says use a Longbow the char pic I have has a shortbow.
I'm just curious what's the big difference? I know shortbows can be used while mounted, but are there any other advantages besides that?
A composite longbow costs and additional 100gp for every point of Strength bonus added to it. A composite shortbow costs and additional 75gp for every point of Strength bonus added to it. Additionally, a shortbow (and the composite version thereof) weighs two pounds, whereas the longbow (and the composite version thereof) weighs three pounds!
Further, as you noted, shortbows and composite shortbows can both be used mounted. The advantage isn't as great as it may initially seem, however (which isn't saying that it really seems all that great initially in the first place). While it is true a regular longbow cannot be used while mounted, a composite longbow can. So... yeah. Shortbows are inferior in almost all regards to longbows.
Interesting precision, Rezdave.
Although, as Ungoded said, composite longbows are apparently generic in D&D3.5, so no difference is made between a daikyu and a "western" composite longbow.
The same way many consider the wakizachi as a short sword, or the katana as a bastard sword...
Yeah. Thanks for the lesson (never heard of a daikyu before), but as I said, "While it is true a regular longbow cannot be used while mounted, a composite longbow can."
D&D composite longbow =/= real world composite longbow.
Yeah. Thanks for the lesson (never heard of a daikyu before)
You can learn more about it and other oriental weapons in Oriental Adventures : Ninjas, samurai, katanas, shuriken and all the stuff :)
D&D composite longbow =/= real world composite longbow.
Tell me about it. The real world sucks.
Garden gnomes don't even talk to animals... :(
|
|
...
Garden gnomes don't even talk to animals... :(Your's don't? O.o
I'm gonna go lock the front door now.
On topic: Gonna go with the long bow. Second Darkness is a lot of underground assumedly and the char is all about one super awesome shot.
By level 15 his long bow will do 1d8 + 4d6 + 4d8 19-20x4 ^_^ not counting magic bonuses, favored enemy bonuses, str bonus for composite and the +4 for killer trait on crits.
Usually shortbow are only worthwhile for classes that are only proficient with them, or for flavor reasons.
|
|
There's also the angle of not only what you start out with, but what you come across. Who's to say that you won't come across a +2 Mighty Composite Hasted Shortbow.
Side note. In D&D, you pay extra for each strength bonus you get to your "mighty" composite bow. I.e., a composite bow doesn't have a strength bonus, only a mighty version does. However, in d20 Modern, a composite bow automatically adds strength damage. (Screw the "mighty" enhancement altogether.) Frankly, I'd be inclined to simplify the game by saying the same for D&D. Thoughts?
...
Garden gnomes don't even talk to animals... :(Your's don't? O.o
I'm gonna go lock the front door now.On topic: Gonna go with the long bow. Second Darkness is a lot of underground assumedly and the char is all about one super awesome shot.
By level 15 his long bow will do 1d8 + 4d6 + 4d8 19-20x4 ^_^ not counting magic bonuses, favored enemy bonuses, str bonus for composite and the +4 for killer trait on crits.
Something you might want to think about is space. A shortbow is easier to use in a cramped space than a longbow. If Second Darkness has a lot (or any) cramped tunnels, especially ones with a low ceiling you might want to think about the Shortbow.
In RotRL my party grabbed every shortbow they could find after realizing their longbows were to big to be used in the
At 15th level the difference between 1d8 + 4d6 + 4d8 19-20x4 and 1d6 + 4d6 + 4d8 19-20x4 is negligible. However, a bow that can be used in every situation can be huge.
I'm making a sniper-type character for Second Darkness (mixing a bit of Scout, Fighter, Ranger, Deepwood Sniper and Order of the Bow Initiate) and while my instinct says use a Longbow the char pic I have has a shortbow.
I'm just curious what's the big difference? I know shortbows can be used while mounted, but are there any other advantages besides that?
If you've chosen elf or half-elf for the character's race, you might consider the following. Take one level of Wizard or Sorcerer (preferably Sorcerer, so you don't have to worry about lugging around spellbooks), then add one level of Arcane Archer. Result: never run out of magical arrows (and the ability to use nifty arcane wands, etc. as needed).
It's great for those pesky opponents with DR x/magic, and even better if you have a good supply of arrows tipped with cold iron, alchemical silver, or adamantium (although the last are very expensive). If you get an aligned bow (Holy, Axiomatic, whatever is needed), you're ready for almost anything.
An alternative to the aligned weapon is if you or a fellow party member chooses the Good Devotion (a Domain feat from Complete Champion), which will align natural and weapon attacks. The Glorious Weapons feat (a Divine feat from Complete Divine) doesn't do the trick for ranged weapons, as it specifically mentions "melee weapons including natural weapons".
Good luck with the build!
Something you might want to think about is space. A shortbow is easier to use in a cramped space than a longbow. If Second Darkness has a lot (or any) cramped tunnels, especially ones with a low ceiling you might want to think about the Shortbow.
[...]
At 15th level the difference between 1d8 + 4d6 + 4d8 19-20x4 and 1d6 + 4d6 + 4d8 19-20x4 is negligible. However, a bow that can be used in every situation can be huge.
But there's nothing in the RAW to indicate a shortbow can be used in any situation that a longbow can't be; further, there are no rules saying a longbow (or any weapon, for that matter) can't be used because of space limitations. So it's up to whether or not the DM wants to implement such restrictions on the charactes, which is another topic entirely and one that has been discussed many times over on these boards....
"You can use a composite longbow while mounted."
House Rule that one right away. Silly Designers.
That's the first thing I did!
That's the first thing I did!"You can use a composite longbow while mounted."
House Rule that one right away. Silly Designers.
But then aren't you just effectively changing the name from composite bow to recurve bow to be more correct in the context of real world historical weapons? I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it's just kind of unusual to have an issue with this now, when 3.x is (technically) dead and gone and 4e is here, since this very rule has been around since the dawn of 3.0. In the end it doesn't matter, so long as players can still have a bow which allows them to add their Strength bonus to damage.
|
I'm making a sniper-type character for Second Darkness (mixing a bit of Scout, Fighter, Ranger, Deepwood Sniper and Order of the Bow Initiate) and while my instinct says use a Longbow the char pic I have has a shortbow.
I'm just curious what's the big difference? I know shortbows can be used while mounted, but are there any other advantages besides that?
And here I thought...
"Well Mr Bond? Which do you think does the most damage? The Long Bow or the Short Bow?" Jarver Bloof dryfired the Short bow into the groin of the Agent now suspended upside down by the chains connecting his ankles...
Styruped GreatbowThe archer lies on the grass, slips feet into the styrups at the middle of the bow and draws the full length of the body until he/she is just below the chin...The Javalin fires from that weapon with sufficiently greater force providing better range and damage.
But then aren't you just effectively changing the name from composite bow to recurve bow to be more correct in the context of real world historical weapons?
No; I mean I restricted bow use while mounted to short bows (regular and whatever the Str type is called). Longbows of either type had to be used while standing, unless you paid masterwork prices for a daikyu (and were in an area where such a bow was culturally available).
But then aren't you just effectively changing the name from composite bow to recurve bow to be more correct in the context of real world historical weapons?No; I mean I restricted bow use while mounted to short bows (regular and whatever the Str type is called). Longbows of either type had to be used while standing, unless you paid masterwork prices for a daikyu (and were in an area where such a bow was culturally available).
Ah, I see. Well, considering how infrequently mounted combat comes up typically, and specifically mounted combat with a bow, I think this houserule is pretty balanced (not that you need or asked for my opinion, but still). Actually, it does give the shortbow a more defined role, mechanically, and makes it a viable weapon choice for a character concept, so (depending on the group's preference for mounted combat), it may actually serve to diversify the game more.
|
|
But then aren't you just effectively changing the name from composite bow to recurve bow to be more correct in the context of real world historical weapons?No; I mean I restricted bow use while mounted to short bows (regular and whatever the Str type is called). Longbows of either type had to be used while standing, unless you paid masterwork prices for a daikyu (and were in an area where such a bow was culturally available).
Why was there never a middle ground in the bow-world? It's always either long or short -- why was there never a bow that was just right?
DISCLAIMER: this is only meant to be taken half-serious
Well, considering how infrequently mounted combat comes up typically, and specifically mounted combat with a bow, I think this houserule is pretty balanced (not that you need or asked for my opinion, but still). Actually, it does give the shortbow a more defined role, mechanically, and makes it a viable weapon choice for a character concept, so (depending on the group's preference for mounted combat), it may actually serve to diversify the game more.
We do a lot of mounted combat, especially before Paizo introduced the paladin's super-weapon as an alternative to the mount. Sabres and short bows are popular items!
Well, considering how infrequently mounted combat comes up typically, and specifically mounted combat with a bow, I think this houserule is pretty balanced (not that you need or asked for my opinion, but still). Actually, it does give the shortbow a more defined role, mechanically, and makes it a viable weapon choice for a character concept, so (depending on the group's preference for mounted combat), it may actually serve to diversify the game more.We do a lot of mounted combat, especially before Paizo introduced the paladin's super-weapon as an alternative to the mount. Sabres and short bows are popular items!
Well, if it works for your game, do it! The shortbow is certainly the more iconic ranged weapon for a mounted warrior (at least for me- I always think of the Mongols). But, just to kind of bring this thing back around, the composite longbow can also be used from the saddle as per the RAW.
But, just to kind of bring this thing back around, the composite longbow can also be used from the saddle as per the RAW.
In a lot of ways, the RAW are seriously overrated. I mean, by the RAW, you can't die of thirst.
|
|
But, just to kind of bring this thing back around, the composite longbow can also be used from the saddle as per the RAW.In a lot of ways, the RAW are seriously overrated. I mean, by the RAW, you can't die of thirst.
Your argument on this particular subject is faulty, because you're comparing what the RAW omits, where he is saying what the RAW states.
I'm making a sniper-type character for Second Darkness (mixing a bit of Scout, Fighter, Ranger, Deepwood Sniper and Order of the Bow Initiate) and while my instinct says use a Longbow the char pic I have has a shortbow.
I'm just curious what's the big difference? I know shortbows can be used while mounted, but are there any other advantages besides that?
I'd like to take a moment here and make a comment on culture. While there may be a variety of metagaming reasons to take one over the other, for Role-playing reasons, it might be more interesting to take the character's actual culture into account. Does the culture favor one over the other? For that matter, do both exist in the culture? Is one considered the weapon of the "enemy" who ever that might be? Is one weapon taught only to certain sexes or people of certain social standings. Does the religion outlaw certain weapons? (As the Church tried to do with firearms?)
Ok, I know not what you asked, but I'd thought I'd get a side comment in.
Your argument on this particular subject is faulty, because you're comparing what the RAW omits, where he is saying what the RAW states.
I'm not arguing; I'm stating. If that particular example fails to illustrate my point, I'm sure you can think of dozens of others... or is your point that the RAW constitute some sort of sublime, perfect, flawless exemplar of all a rules system could be?
|
|
Your argument on this particular subject is faulty, because you're comparing what the RAW omits, where he is saying what the RAW states.I'm not arguing; I'm stating. If that particular example fails to illustrate my point, I'm sure you can think of dozens of others... or is your point that the RAW constitute some sort of sublime, perfect, flawless exemplar of all a rules system could be?
It just seemed like you were trying to disprove his point by making a blanket statement about the rules, and that because certain parts are flawed, all of it is.
My point was that it was a bad example. Your point would have been better explained had you chosen a rule that is there but doesn't make sense (other than what is being argued here), but you used an omission to justify a blanket statement.
Why was there never a middle ground in the bow-world? It's always either long or short -- why was there never a bow that was just right?
DISCLAIMER: this is only meant to be taken half-serious
Didn't anyone ever tell you... It's not the size of the bow that matters it's how you use it.
It just seemed like you were trying to disprove his point by making a blanket statement about the rules, and that because certain parts are flawed, all of it is.
Agreed, I could have picked a better example. For example, in my opinion, the rule about mounted longbow use is flawed. There are others as well. Certainly we'll all agree that there can be specific flaws without the rules as a whole being useless -- my point was that it's not an all-or-nothing situation -- and I should have expressed that more clearly. Pointing out that something is "RAW" in no way automatically makes it a bad rule -- but nor does it automatically imply a useful, logical, or valuable rule, either.